RoI rejects religion...

[JohnD]

As someone mentioned earlier, why haven't these homosexuals tried to order a cake proclaiming their sexuality from a muslim baker?

breadnbutter tells us that one has. Have you not read the thread? No information is provided on what protests or further events may have followed.

It seems that, in this country, we have a hierarchy of personal situations and beliefs, and Christianity comes somewhere near the bottom of the pile.

You are stunningly ignorant. Or perhaps you seek to deceive.

Are you not aware the Bishops are given some free seats in the House of Lords?

Are you not aware of State subsidies to Church Schools?

Are you not aware of Public Holidays attached to Christian festivals?

Are you not aware of requirements for principally Christian worship in schools?

 

[Belboz]

And thank goodness that the current law makers do prevent the bigotry you support.

They dont' - the laws have merely forced individuals to find alternative methods instead of being honest about their own personal choices.

As for bigotry, you would be very hard pushed to find anyone on the planet who doesn't fall under the definition of a bigot.

We all grow up with attitudes and prejudices. Stereotyping - created by prejudice - is a daily occurrence across all walks of life.

 

[JohnD]

The law does not prevent you from being an ignorant and hateful bigot.

However it does limit your freedom to express your hateful bigotry in certain forms of discrimination.

 

[Belboz]

The law does not prevent you from being an ignorant and hateful bigot.

However it does limit your freedom to express your hateful bigotry in certain forms of discrimination.

But does it not also remove personal choice where 'hateful bigotry' is not in evidence?

I seriously doubt that the bakery couple who refused to bake the cake had any hatred for homosexuals. They said their personal religious choice dictated that they ought to refuse.

Likewise the guest house couple.

Views??

 

[Gasman77]

The law does not prevent you from being an ignorant and hateful bigot.

However it does limit your freedom to express your hateful bigotry in certain forms of discrimination.

But does it not also remove personal choice where 'hateful bigotry' is not in evidence?

I seriously doubt that the bakery couple who refused to bake the cake had any hatred for homosexuals. They said their personal religious choice dictated that they ought to refuse.

Likewise the guest house couple.

Views??

In my opinion, which is also legally supported, your personal choices do not trump a level of equality I am afforded.

If you choose to discrimate against someone for reasons they cannot change, such as sexuality, sex or ethnicity, your freedom of choice puts you in contravention of not only the law but popular public opinion.

Religion is a choice. Being gay is not.

If the majority of the public felt the same way as you, these occurrences would be commonplace, and not make the news or courtrooms.

 

[EFLImpudence]

I seriously doubt that the bakery couple who refused to bake the cake had any hatred for homosexuals. They said their personal religious choice dictated that they ought to refuse.
Likewise the guest house couple.
Views??

Well, my view is that their religious beliefs are fantasy and therefore irrelevant.

However, are these religious beliefs not contrary to the teachings of Jesus?

So, as is asked many times without answer, how do they choose which religious beliefs to follow and which to ignore?

 

[Micilin]

I seriously doubt that the bakery couple who refused to bake the cake had any hatred for homosexuals. They said their personal religious choice dictated that they ought to refuse.
Likewise the guest house couple.
Views??

Well, my view is that their religious beliefs are fantasy and therefore irrelevant.

However, are these religious beliefs not contrary to the teachings of Jesus?

So, as is asked many times without answer, how do they choose which religious beliefs to follow and which to ignore?

You'll be waiting a while, there is no sensible answer they can give.

It's another circular argument from the religious .

I cherry pick these verses because they fit with my bigotry.
I am a bigot because the verses I have cherry picked tell me I should be.


It's been asked many times in many different threads, and nobody has has the honesty to take it on.

What you may get in lieu of an answer is another quote ,with no sense of irony or self awareness, which only reinforces the point that the poster has no answer.

 

[Belboz]

In my opinion, which is also legally supported, your personal choices do not trump a level of equality I am afforded.

But the level of equality is allowed to trumph (sic) someone's personal choices?

If you choose to discrimate against someone for reasons they cannot change, such as sexuality, sex or ethnicity, your freedom of choice puts you in contravention of not only the law but popular public opinion.

Religion is a choice. Being gay is not.

If the majority of the public felt the same way as you, these occurrences would be commonplace, and not make the news or courtrooms.

The original question mentioned Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses and Travellers. In your analysis, as all of these can choose to change, it would not be discrimination to refuse them a service then?

As for 'popular public opinion' and 'the majority of the public', I would not be so bold as to suggest I know definitively what the general public really think but I can say this....

One of the reasons I responded to this topic was because the 'cake bake' story has been widely discussed by almost all of those I know and the issue came back as not one of being pro or anti-gay but as a debate on personal choice in relation to refusing a service.

Of course, berks may well be different.

 

[JohnD]

If a black man, or a jew, or a homosexual, or a jehova's witness, or a traveller, wants to buy a cake. or stay in a hotel, or enter a bar, is the proprietor entitled to refuse just because the would-be customer is a black man, or a jew, or a homosexual, or a jehova's witness, or a traveller, which the proprietor dislikes or disapproves of?

 

[Dextraneous]

If a black man, or a jew, or a homosexual, or a jehova's witness, or a traveller, wants to buy a cake. or stay in a hotel, or enter a bar, is the proprietor entitled to refuse just because the would-be customer is a black man, or a jew, or a homosexual, or a jehova's witness, or a traveller, which the proprietor dislikes or disapproves of?

Yes.

 

[Gasman77]

In my opinion, which is also legally supported, your personal choices do not trump a level of equality I am afforded.

But the level of equality is allowed to trumph (sic) someone's personal choices?
Yes

If you choose to discrimate against someone for reasons they cannot change, such as sexuality, sex or ethnicity, your freedom of choice puts you in contravention of not only the law but popular public opinion.

Religion is a choice. Being gay is not.

If the majority of the public felt the same way as you, these occurrences would be commonplace, and not make the news or courtrooms.

The original question mentioned Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses and Travellers. In your analysis, as all of these can choose to change, it would not be discrimination to refuse them a service then?
Yes, I didn't say exclusively

As for 'popular public opinion' and 'the majority of the public', I would not be so bold as to suggest I know definitively what the general public really think but I can say this....
Neither did I, but surely you accept laws generally reflect public feeling?

One of the reasons I responded to this topic was because the 'cake bake' story has been widely discussed by almost all of those I know and the issue came back as not one of being pro or anti-gay but as a debate on personal choice in relation to refusing a service.
Personal choice is just a thinly veiled way of saying you wish to discriminate against those who are different to you

Of course, berks may well be different.

My world is clearly vastly different from yours

 

[Belboz]

Gasman77,

One of the better aspects of this forum is to be able to debate issues and we have done so. Clearly, you and I are never going to agree on this issue.

I still maintain that the owner of a public house, hotel, bakery or whatever should have the option to refuse custom but I do see your point of view (whilst disagreeing with it - of course)

Discrimination - or whatever you wish to call it is all around us because all humans discriminate in one form or another. Some of it may be through prejudice (taught or experienced), some through fear and some through pure dislike but it is a fact of life.

I do agree that SOME laws relect public feeling but there are many laws which do not represent what we would term the majority public view.


Lastly -yes - I clearly do live in a vastly different world to you. At least, our social circles must be vastly different.

 

[AronSearle]

Private businesses should be able to refuse trade with whoever they like, for any reason they like.

Just as we can then refuse to buy their goods or services, for any reason we like.

 

[JohnD]

Like this, you mean

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-7eNRB2_0Q&feature=player_detailpage

I for one am very glad that such abuses are now very much less acceptable

But, to Britain's shame, they are still present http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-24372509

 

[Deleted member 63160]

Why didn't they say they were too busy? If I don't like a customer or the look of a job I become too busy.