Author Topic: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.  (Read 111499 times)

McNamee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12290
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2014, 06:12:33 PM »
Yes now that the entire story is known...I would support Ashers bakery...

Dommo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24280
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #16 on: November 07, 2014, 06:47:12 PM »
Asher's did not discriminate against gay people. They entered a contract in good faith without being aware that the cake would carry a 'political' message. In my view they are eminently entitled to refuse. I assume that they would have refused had it been an unmarried heterosexual person, a married heterosexual couple [married or unmarried], Catholic or Protestant customers who were asking for this particular message. The refusal is not on the ground of anyone's sexuality but on the grounds of offence against personal belief and a 'political' message. I would not have expected them to write 'UP the IRA' or 'UVF' and had they done so the PC lobby would have gone crackers. Don't often agree with Peter Robinson but he is totally correct in saying that the Equality Commission is 'bonkers' for taking this to court. Don't often agree with the 'saved' lobby either but would contribute to a fun to help Ashers fight this one! Interestingly, a fair number of gay people disown this particular move.
I agree. A baker is not a slave and should not be compelled to violate his conscience. Just like you should not force a gay man to marry a woman, you should not force someone to write sheet on a cake if they don't like it. The gay guys can live without cake or can get it elsewhere.
I'm off to sue a Muslim because he won't cook me up black pubdding.
if yer gonna act the chivo, beware the chupacabra

lcb10

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #17 on: November 07, 2014, 07:16:13 PM »
Hi. I'm going to put a lot in this first comment, because it's a typical situation of modern society, with a bit of a fight going on, where the fundamental issues are seldom seen clearly.

I agree with GandT who mentions contract.

That defines the situation. People are free to make a business, to sell things or services which they choose, by inviting people to make contracts with them.

Saying that anyone is legally obliged, or forced, to engage in a kind of contract which they would never have invited anyone to make with them, cannot be right or acceptable in a free, capitalist society.

(I'm not saying I'm a big modern capitalist supporter per se, in the modern climate where we're learning there's a lot to be improved. But there are basic liberties and rights which a free capitalist society brings and which we should rely on.)

Basically, the question seems to come down to - can someone go to another person (or business) who frequently contracts with people, and say, "Listen - you AGREE to make this thing for me, now, OR ELSE. No choice. Just do it, or I'll land you a big fine and maybe close you down if you don't give in to the principle eventually. And who knows, maybe a jail sentence if you disagree in the wrong way. The law says you will agree to do what I want."

The point is that that possibility of a society is, well, Soviet style, basically - communist, totalitarian, fascist

If the law steps in to force the shop to perform for the person threatening the shop, this is a fascist - communist, totalitarian and non-capitalist kind of society.

Basically, it would mean, there is no civil contract law anymore, no contracts, and no freedom of establishment of services.

The first thing is that that attitude steps clearly outside of the whole idea and basis of contract law.

There can be no compulsions whatsoever for someone to form a civil contract - each party must be free to choose.
A contract is, basically offer and acceptance, where no-one can be forced in any way to agree or offer.

The bakery publishes an "invitation to treat" - meaning it invites members of the public to make an offer to contract. The invitation to treat is "We make cakes of many different kinds, order your cake from us".

But that is not a contract at this stage, because every single contract requires the terms of the individual contract to be exact. If there is any inclarity in what seems to be an agreement or negotiation - it cannot be recognised in contract law as a contract. (And so can't be enforced).

Shops and bakeries etc. deal in contracts. That's how they trade.

In the capitalist society which I much prefer over a Soviet style society, people aren't forced by the government to make contracts they would never choose themselves. What would be the point of someone choosing to go into a certain line of service business - whether making smoothies, party entertainment events, or making T-Shirts to make people happy, or making cakes - when they have to make things they'd never accept themselves to make? People make what they choose to make, give services how they choose. Or else, again, fundamentally, we are in a fascist, totalitarian society.

There is one main issue, in two parts:

1. A member of the public is (and should be) free to contract with anyone who he / she finds who will fulfil the service or provide the goods which can be agreed between them.

2. A service provider has the freedom to choose what they want to provide, to sell what they choose to sell, and an artisan to make what they choose to make. Contracts can only be formed on that basis.

If a member of the public does not find someone who wants to make the particular item they desire they can:

a. look elsewhere. ... ... ... There will be no problem, eventually, with the person in question finding someone who will make the Queerspace cake in question somewhere in the region of Bangor or Greater Belfast. So, like everyone else, they should just look elsewhere and find the shop which will do what they want, and just, OF COURSE, leave the shop that chooses not to alone - because it's not what it does.

b. make it themselves. ... ... ... It's simply wildly inaccurate to claim that everything is available for everyone in today's world. Businesses make / provide certain things, which they choose. While in this case with the Queerspace cake, again, you can be sure the cake in question would be made by a bakery within a reasonable distance, in many cases though, you just can't get what you want. (Unless money is no object for you and you pay an agent to look around the nation or the world for you.)

c. give up. It stands to reason. Again, though with the Queerspace cake, a baker obviously is going to be found to make it - you can't expect that everything you want is available. The only things available are what business or people wish to produce based on what you can agreee on in a contract. This is the way it is. This is how it works. You don't own the marketplace. You don't live in a dream. You live in a world where people choose to make / provide what they want of what they can to make a living in that way.

Why ask a Christian bakery which happens not to agree with Gay Marriage to make a cake supporting / celebrating Gay Marriage?
Why?
Why not just go elsewhere and not annoy those people who you have no agreement with?
Why try to force them to do it?
What on earth would anyone do that for?
To force an "AGREEMENT" (really meaning the opposite of an agreement, because agreement entails choice) for a contract for something which the shop is idealogically against?


It's not correct to say that the issue of discrimination - an important issue - is relevant here:

Christian is the official (nominal) religion of this nation, UK.
Many Christians believe that homosexuality is, they claim as their ancient text delcares. While they recognise it is legal, they hold it is not a moral choice and they don't advocate it.
Gay Marriage is a very new thing for the world - a really recent idea.
Gay Marriage is not allowed in something like 99 plus % of the world.
This seems not to be an issue against homosexuality itself, but Gay Marriage.

In any case, I would think an artisan, and shop, should be allowed to refuse all invitations to form a contract to make something which offends their moral sensibilities - even just if about plain homosexuality, not connected to Gay Marriage.

The shop says, "I'm sorry, but we do not make such items ourselves, as they do not fit in with our personal beliefs".

How can that be wrong?

How can the law rightly say, "No, sorry, make the cake or pay us a big fine, hear?"

---

I support rights for people who identify as homosexual or have some connection with homosexual activity.

However, at least as much, probably more (only because no-one mentions it nowadays), I support the rights of every single person to have their own thoughts and feelings and, reasonably, act by them. This includes being or feeling averse to the notion of homosexuality, and as long as they don't threaten or harm other people, it includes being fully open about, and acting normally by, their feelings of being averse to homosexuality.

Because that's how they feel. That's their right. It should never be legally questioned. People should not be discriminated against for feeling that way. It's their right to feel as they do, just as it is the right of anyone to engage in homosexual activity, or publicly celebrate homosexual love.


It is an unfortunate truth that many people who identify as homosexual will talk to the ends of time about equality of rights and identity, but think this excludes other people from having their own natural thoughts and feelings. Equality really means that people who dislike homosexuality also should be allowed to be open and free about their opinion or feeling - as long as it doesn't cause harm or threaten the safety or wellbeing (in normal terms) of another person.

---

Like GandT, I find it a bit funny I'm agreeing with Peter Robinson, saying the Equality Commission's decision is "bonkers", not so long after the man openly and clearly said that we should not discriminate against certain Asians, while, of course, they're really only fit to be servants and nothing more. (BTW I can't believe he survived that fuss, showing what a backwater Northern Ireland is. If such commenting came from a politician in London and made the press, I'm more or less sure one way or the other, they'd have had to resign. Whether from pressure from their party initially, or groups and members of the public making clear it is completely unacceptable for a politician in office to say.)

Patsy-Ann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6693
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #18 on: November 07, 2014, 07:18:58 PM »
Yes now that the entire story is known...I would support Ashers bakery...
O0 The cake was available the slogan was not so what ...just go get another baker....but sue and hope for money. ...well I hope Ashers get the money and it is a shame that the tax payer is paying for such a petty dispute. It will cost thousands at a time when we cannot afford it.  :( :( :( :(
We make a living by what we get...We make a life by what we Give.

Dommo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24280
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #19 on: November 07, 2014, 07:47:19 PM »
O0 The cake was available the slogan was not so what ...just go get another baker....but sue and hope for money. ...well I hope Ashers get the money and it is a shame that the tax payer is paying for such a petty dispute. It will cost thousands at a time when we cannot afford it.  :( :( :( :(
when some folks said watch out fir the gay lobby we were told they only wanted to be free of discrimination.  Now they are hounding everyone who doesn't cater to them or prefers to not know about them
if yer gonna act the chivo, beware the chupacabra

lcb10

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #20 on: November 07, 2014, 07:50:15 PM »
Northern Ireland's first gay mayor said "businesses should not be able to pick and choose who they serve".

It's nothing to do with who they serve. It's about the service, of course.

I don't think even the group who wanted the cake made thought they were being refused having any cakes made for them because of their sexuality, personally.

I hope the man doesn't continue to make these categorical errors.

Dommo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24280
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #21 on: November 07, 2014, 07:51:58 PM »
Hi. I'm going to put a lot in this first comment, because it's a typical situation of modern society, with a bit of a fight going on, where the fundamental issues are seldom seen clearly.

I agree with GandT who mentions contract.

That defines the situation. People are free to make a business, to sell things or services which they choose, by inviting people to make contracts with them.

Saying that anyone is legally obliged, or forced, to engage in a kind of contract which they would never have invited anyone to make with them, cannot be right or acceptable in a free, capitalist society.

(I'm not saying I'm a big modern capitalist supporter per se, in the modern climate where we're learning there's a lot to be improved. But there are basic liberties and rights which a free capitalist society brings and which we should rely on.)

Basically, the question seems to come down to - can someone go to another person (or business) who frequently contracts with people, and say, "Listen - you AGREE to make this thing for me, now, OR ELSE. No choice. Just do it, or I'll land you a big fine and maybe close you down if you don't give in to the principle eventually. And who knows, maybe a jail sentence if you disagree in the wrong way. The law says you will agree to do what I want."

The point is that that possibility of a society is, well, Soviet style, basically - communist, totalitarian, fascist

If the law steps in to force the shop to perform for the person threatening the shop, this is a fascist - communist, totalitarian and non-capitalist kind of society.

Basically, it would mean, there is no civil contract law anymore, no contracts, and no freedom of establishment of services.

The first thing is that that attitude steps clearly outside of the whole idea and basis of contract law.

There can be no compulsions whatsoever for someone to form a civil contract - each party must be free to choose.
A contract is, basically offer and acceptance, where no-one can be forced in any way to agree or offer.

The bakery publishes an "invitation to treat" - meaning it invites members of the public to make an offer to contract. The invitation to treat is "We make cakes of many different kinds, order your cake from us".

But that is not a contract at this stage, because every single contract requires the terms of the individual contract to be exact. If there is any inclarity in what seems to be an agreement or negotiation - it cannot be recognised in contract law as a contract. (And so can't be enforced).

Shops and bakeries etc. deal in contracts. That's how they trade.

In the capitalist society which I much prefer over a Soviet style society, people aren't forced by the government to make contracts they would never choose themselves. What would be the point of someone choosing to go into a certain line of service business - whether making smoothies, party entertainment events, or making T-Shirts to make people happy, or making cakes - when they have to make things they'd never accept themselves to make? People make what they choose to make, give services how they choose. Or else, again, fundamentally, we are in a fascist, totalitarian society.

There is one main issue, in two parts:

1. A member of the public is (and should be) free to contract with anyone who he / she finds who will fulfil the service or provide the goods which can be agreed between them.

2. A service provider has the freedom to choose what they want to provide, to sell what they choose to sell, and an artisan to make what they choose to make. Contracts can only be formed on that basis.

If a member of the public does not find someone who wants to make the particular item they desire they can:

a. look elsewhere. ... ... ... There will be no problem, eventually, with the person in question finding someone who will make the Queerspace cake in question somewhere in the region of Bangor or Greater Belfast. So, like everyone else, they should just look elsewhere and find the shop which will do what they want, and just, OF COURSE, leave the shop that chooses not to alone - because it's not what it does.

b. make it themselves. ... ... ... It's simply wildly inaccurate to claim that everything is available for everyone in today's world. Businesses make / provide certain things, which they choose. While in this case with the Queerspace cake, again, you can be sure the cake in question would be made by a bakery within a reasonable distance, in many cases though, you just can't get what you want. (Unless money is no object for you and you pay an agent to look around the nation or the world for you.)

c. give up. It stands to reason. Again, though with the Queerspace cake, a baker obviously is going to be found to make it - you can't expect that everything you want is available. The only things available are what business or people wish to produce based on what you can agreee on in a contract. This is the way it is. This is how it works. You don't own the marketplace. You don't live in a dream. You live in a world where people choose to make / provide what they want of what they can to make a living in that way.

Why ask a Christian bakery which happens not to agree with Gay Marriage to make a cake supporting / celebrating Gay Marriage?
Why?
Why not just go elsewhere and not annoy those people who you have no agreement with?
Why try to force them to do it?
What on earth would anyone do that for?
To force an "AGREEMENT" (really meaning the opposite of an agreement, because agreement entails choice) for a contract for something which the shop is idealogically against?


It's not correct to say that the issue of discrimination - an important issue - is relevant here:

Christian is the official (nominal) religion of this nation, UK.
Many Christians believe that homosexuality is, they claim as their ancient text delcares. While they recognise it is legal, they hold it is not a moral choice and they don't advocate it.
Gay Marriage is a very new thing for the world - a really recent idea.
Gay Marriage is not allowed in something like 99 plus % of the world.
This seems not to be an issue against homosexuality itself, but Gay Marriage.

In any case, I would think an artisan, and shop, should be allowed to refuse all invitations to form a contract to make something which offends their moral sensibilities - even just if about plain homosexuality, not connected to Gay Marriage.

The shop says, "I'm sorry, but we do not make such items ourselves, as they do not fit in with our personal beliefs".

How can that be wrong?

How can the law rightly say, "No, sorry, make the cake or pay us a big fine, hear?"

---

I support rights for people who identify as homosexual or have some connection with homosexual activity.

However, at least as much, probably more (only because no-one mentions it nowadays), I support the rights of every single person to have their own thoughts and feelings and, reasonably, act by them. This includes being or feeling averse to the notion of homosexuality, and as long as they don't threaten or harm other people, it includes being fully open about, and acting normally by, their feelings of being averse to homosexuality.

Because that's how they feel. That's their right. It should never be legally questioned. People should not be discriminated against for feeling that way. It's their right to feel as they do, just as it is the right of anyone to engage in homosexual activity, or publicly celebrate homosexual love.


It is an unfortunate truth that many people who identify as homosexual will talk to the ends of time about equality of rights and identity, but think this excludes other people from having their own natural thoughts and feelings. Equality really means that people who dislike homosexuality also should be allowed to be open and free about their opinion or feeling - as long as it doesn't cause harm or threaten the safety or wellbeing (in normal terms) of another person.

---

Like GandT, I find it a bit funny I'm agreeing with Peter Robinson, saying the Equality Commission's decision is "bonkers", not so long after the man openly and clearly said that we should not discriminate against certain Asians, while, of course, they're really only fit to be servants and nothing more. (BTW I can't believe he survived that fuss, showing what a backwater Northern Ireland is. If such commenting came from a politician in London and made the press, I'm more or less sure one way or the other, they'd have had to resign. Whether from pressure from their party initially, or groups and members of the public making clear it is completely unacceptable for a politician in office to say.)
the only thing I disagree with is I don't think religion is relevant. There are lots  of gay Protestant churches and the UK has no official  religion. Yes I know about England and Scotland. But if most people in ni become Jews or Jains they still should  it have to bate out cakes that they object to.  No one should. People are not zombie slaves of the state.
if yer gonna act the chivo, beware the chupacabra

Dommo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24280
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #22 on: November 07, 2014, 07:58:20 PM »
Northern Ireland's first gay mayor said "businesses should not be able to pick and choose who they serve".

It's nothing to do with who they serve. It's about the service, of course.

I don't think even the group who wanted the cake made thought they were being refused having any cakes made for them because of their sexuality, personally.

I hope the man doesn't continue to make these categorical errors.
why should they serve whomever they want. If so
Some came to him with a requeT to do anti gay poster would he be as enthused?  It manly he expressed an Opinion. How come his opinion is okay but others' opinions dont matter?
if yer gonna act the chivo, beware the chupacabra

GandT

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5640
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #23 on: November 07, 2014, 08:12:04 PM »
why should they serve whomever they want. If so
Some came to him with a requeT to do anti gay poster would he be as enthused?  It manly he expressed an Opinion. How come his opinion is okay but others' opinions dont matter?

Because  he believes that there is a secular, popular, moral relativism out there which is able to dictate to others what they should believe, how they should act and how they must conform to civil norms in place of religious beliefs. There is a tendency to represent the permanent beliefs of some as obsolete, of a bygone era and of no relevance in the modern world. There are some who subscribe to the opposite point of view - there are beliefs that no civil law can or will change. I doubt if I would sympathise with the view of Asher's bakery on many issues; I doubt if I would sympathise even with their views on gay marriage [civil ceremony]. However, I agree entirely that they are not obliged to be slogan-writers, propagandists and apologists for any cause to which they have objection. More power to them on this particular stance!

Dommo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24280
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #24 on: November 07, 2014, 08:15:19 PM »
Because  he believes that there is a secular, popular, moral relativism out there which is able to dictate to others what they should believe, how they should act and how they must conform to civil norms in place of religious beliefs. There is a tendency to represent the permanent beliefs of some as obsolete, of a bygone era and of no relevance in the modern world. There are some who subscribe to the opposite point of view - there are beliefs that no civil law can or will change. I doubt if I would sympathise with the view of Asher's bakery on many issues; I doubt if I would sympathise even with their views on gay marriage [civil ceremony]. However, I agree entirely that they are not obliged to be slogan-writers, propagandists and apologists for any cause to which they have objection. More power to them on this particular stance!
i agree. I'd never axe a gay baker to do an anti gay Ivan and them sue him over it. Because it involves the gay folks though a lot of peeps feel obliged to go along with them for fear of being called phobes etc. However they should be cautious. If they are okay with the state forcing business to do things they've no interest in, then the folks who like this type of fascism might be the next victims.
if yer gonna act the chivo, beware the chupacabra

lcb10

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #25 on: November 07, 2014, 08:19:05 PM »
why should they serve whomever they want.
(Dommo)

Again, the issue is not about serving whomever they want or not.
It's about CHOOSING the service.

Here's an example: a cake is available with the same message, sold everyday, with the icing saying, "Celebrate Love", and the Queerspace folks came up to the bakery and asked for it, adding they want it for a Gay Marriage celebration they're having.
The bakery have sold this cake to everyone else who has asked for it for years.
But, that day, they say to the Queerspace people, "Naw, you're not gettin' it. Not for that kind of celebration."

I suppose that would indeed be discrimination, and illegal.

The point is that the bakery are able to pick and choose exactly what cakes they make. (But not by who they want to sell to.) They are an artisan and a trade. The way our country works is that provision of services is a civil venture - up to anyone who wants to be a shop or service provider to sell what they choose.

So - they choose what they sell, but not who they sell to. Because the latter can be discrimination, but the former is just normal in a civil, capitalist, non-totalitarian society.

Each sale is a contract, and it is based only on Agreement between the shop and the customer.

A business cannot be forced to do a service it doesn't want to do.

Whether the cake message is controversial or not, it doesn't matter - the business would not be forced to make a cake for this if it didn't want to.
Example: Someone asks a bakery to make a cake to celebrate the local climbing group tackling Everest. The baker hates climbing and lost her father to climbing, and thinks it is a reckless, wild, stupid way to act.

The baker never makes cakes about climbing, and refuses for the local climbing group.

That's fine, in our society. The service provider chooses as they see fit.

In our laws, that can never be questioned - it is the fundamental definition of how businesses operate. They sell what they want. They choose what they sell, but not who they sell to (unless you don't meet certain criteria they have, for example for a loan or account services.)

It is true that nowadays, people are using discrimination laws in the wrong way - and it can be used to challenge these freedoms of life, such as business freedoms.

We don't live in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany (yet, quite). Businesses are just people who choose to sell items or services. They sell what they want. The day that the government forces businesses to sell what they don't want is the day we step into communism or fascism.

Dommo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24280
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #26 on: November 07, 2014, 08:22:31 PM »
why should they serve whomever they want.
(Dommo)

Again, the issue is not about serving whomever they want or not.
It's about CHOOSING the service.

Here's an example: a cake is available with the same message, sold everyday, with the icing saying, "Celebrate Love", and the Queerspace folks came up to the bakery and asked for it, adding they want it for a Gay Marriage celebration they're having.
The bakery have sold this cake to everyone else who has asked for it for years.
But, that day, they say to the Queerspace people, "Naw, you're not gettin' it. Not for that kind of celebration."

I suppose that would indeed be discrimination, and illegal.

The point is that the bakery are able to pick and choose exactly what cakes they make. (But not by who they want to sell to.) They are an artisan and a trade. The way our country works is that provision of services is a civil venture - up to anyone who wants to be a shop or service provider to sell what they choose.

So - they choose what they sell, but not who they sell to. Because the latter can be discrimination, but the former is just normal in a civil, capitalist, non-totalitarian society.

Each sale is a contract, and it is based only on Agreement between the shop and the customer.

A business cannot be forced to do a service it doesn't want to do.

Whether the cake message is controversial or not, it doesn't matter - the business would not be forced to make a cake for this if it didn't want to.
Example: Someone asks a bakery to make a cake to celebrate the local climbing group tackling Everest. The baker hates climbing and lost her father to climbing, and thinks it is a reckless, wild, stupid way to act.

The baker never makes cakes about climbing, and refuses for the local climbing group.

That's fine, in our society. The service provider chooses as they see fit.

In our laws, that can never be questioned - it is the fundamental definition of how businesses operate. They sell what they want. They choose what they sell, but not who they sell to (unless you don't meet certain criteria they have, for example for a loan or account services.)

It is true that nowadays, people are using discrimination laws in the wrong way - and it can be used to challenge these freedoms of life, such as business freedoms.

We don't live in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany (yet, quite). Businesses are just people who choose to sell items or services. They sell what they want. The day that the government forces businesses to sell what they don't want is the day we step into communism or fascism.
thats a Good clarification.
if yer gonna act the chivo, beware the chupacabra

toadstool999

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4018
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #27 on: November 07, 2014, 08:25:29 PM »
Northern Ireland's first gay mayor said "businesses should not be able to pick and choose who they serve".

It's nothing to do with who they serve. It's about the service, of course.

I don't think even the group who wanted the cake made thought they were being refused having any cakes made for them because of their sexuality, personally.

I hope the man doesn't continue to make these categorical errors.

Would he say the same thing if a gay couple who ran a bakery were asked to decorate a cake with the words  "Gay Marriage is an abomination"?
Artificial Intelligence is no match for Natural Stupidity

McNamee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12290
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #28 on: November 07, 2014, 08:27:25 PM »
Well lets hope so.

Dommo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24280
Re: Ashers bakery, any thoughts.
« Reply #29 on: November 07, 2014, 08:31:14 PM »

Would he say the same thing if a gay couple who ran a bakery were asked to decorate a cake with the words  "Gay Marriage is an abomination"?
i don't know him but I have dealt with this issues locally. As far as I've seen the gay activists absolutely insist they are right and everyone must not only tolerate them but actively support them. Anyone who doesn't mustbe fired. Fined or jailed. I have theories why. If anyone here wernt to a gay baker and axed for an anti gay cake they likely be arrested
if yer gonna act the chivo, beware the chupacabra