The U.K. Supreme Court rules bakery did not discriminate over gay cake message

[Notanumber]

Well an activist would not get away with it after yesterday's court ruling.

Will that be the end of the matter or will our Big Brother the EU have something to say about it?

 

[metis]

First of all, since I don't live in the UK, I really don't have a say one way or another. As a matter of fact, we got enough problems here in the States that need some serious fixing without me meddling in someone else's country's affairs.

As for me, I am opposed to sexual discrimination in general, so the question I would have to ask is if a cake company is making and selling cakes for the general public, why discriminate against gay couples by not doing what they requested? Just because I may make a cake with writing on it that I don't agree with doesn't mean I have to change my personal feelings and rush out and try to find a gay partner to marry me.

So, the question I have is is the cake store serving the general public or aren't they, and if they are, what's the big deal? Are they next not going to bake cakes for Jews? blacks? politicians?

Oh wait, let me rethink the last item, OK.

 

[Revoltingest]

This is a form of easy cynicism I disagree with, much though I like bacon sandwiches.

It is not only the lawyers who win and it is not the lawyers that design the law. The rule of law is what prevents mob rule. It is a crucial protection of the weak and the unpopular against the tyranny of the majority. As we can see in this case in fact. A Northern Ireland Protestant baker is not exactly UK mainstream in his views, but his rights, and those of others who may find themselves in a similar position, have been upheld. A good piece of pushback against an unthinking tide of politically correct opinion.

I agree that we need the rule of law.
But it's a problem that....
- Most legislators are lawyers. They design laws with ambiguity to fight over.
- Theses legislators prevent Americastan from having a "loser pay" system.
This encourages frivolous suits because the plaintiff has nothing at risk.
They're also hostile to arbitration agreements.
- All judges were once lawyers, & typically will be lawyers again.
It's in their interest to maintain a system which enriches their kind.
- There are many ancillary industries dependent upon lengthy court proceedings....mediators, handwriting analysts
(One cannot record court proceedings. Want a record of it? Spend thousands to get transcripts.)

The "justice industrial complex" is a ravenous beast with a life of its own.
Mine is a hard won cynicism borne of experience.....hardly "easy".

 

[Altfish]

That's u

Will that be the end of the matter or will our Big Brother the EU have something to say about it?

That's up to the purchasers of the cake appealing again, and by the time we get to the ECJ we'll be out.

 

[exchemist]

First of all, since I don't live in the UK, I really don't have a say one way or another. As a matter of fact, we got enough problems here in the States that need some serious fixing without me meddling in someone else's country's affairs.

As for me, I am opposed to sexual discrimination in general, so the question I would have to ask is if a cake company is making and selling cakes for the general public, why discriminate against gay couples by not doing what they requested? Just because I may make a cake with writing on it that I don't agree with doesn't mean I have to change my personal feelings and rush out and try to find a gay partner to marry me.

So, the question I have is is the cake store serving the general public or aren't they, and if they are, what's the big deal? Are they next not going to bake cakes for Jews? blacks? politicians?

Oh wait, let me rethink the last item, OK.

No the point is they refused to bake a cake with a political slogan on it. Interestingly, Peter Tatchell, one of the foremost gay rights activists in the UK - almost a "professional gay", one might say - agreed strongly with the verdict.

Businesses are generally free to turn down politically charged commissions. A campaign for gay marriage is clearly a political campaign, especially given that Parliament has only recently changed the law to permit it in England, and in Northern Ireland, where this took place, the devolved government has still not legislated for it.

It is a bit much if a business gets fined for not wanting to promote something that is not even legal!

So it is not discriminating against gay couples. The baker is more than happy to serve this customer and employs some gay staff, apparently. He just is against gay marriage.

 

[exchemist]

I agree that we need the rule of law.
But it's a problem that....
- Most legislators are lawyers. They design laws with ambiguity to fight over.
- Theses legislators prevent Americastan from having a "loser pay" system.
This encourages frivolous suits because the plaintiff has nothing at risk.
They're also hostile to arbitration agreements.
- All judges were once lawyers, & typically will be lawyers again.
It's in their interest to maintain a system which enriches their kind.
- There are many ancillary industries dependent upon lengthy court proceedings....mediators, handwriting analysts
(One cannot record court proceedings. Want a record of it? Spend thousands to get transcripts.)

The "justice industrial complex" is a ravenous beast with a life of its own.
Mine is a hard won cynicism borne of experience.....hardly "easy".

Aha thanks for the background. Have you read Bleak House? You and Dickens evidently share the same jaundiced* view of the legal profession.

Having worked on the fringes of the law for a short while I do not have the impression it is made deliberately obscure for the sake of enrichment of the profession. That strikes me as a conspiracy theory. My experience of life is that cock-up, rather than conspiracy, is the usual explanation for sub-optimal outcomes.



*in-joke here if you have read the book

 

[Notanumber]

That's u

That's up to the purchasers of the cake appealing again, and by the time we get to the ECJ we'll be out.

Let’s hope so.

 

[Revoltingest]

Aha thanks for the background. Have you read Bleak House? You and Dickens evidently share the same jaundiced* view of the legal profession.

I'm not familiar with that comic....er....graphic novel.

Having worked on the fringes of the law for a short while I do not have the impression it is made deliberately obscure for the sake of enrichment of the profession. That strikes me as a conspiracy theory. My experience of life is that cock-up, rather than conspiracy, is the usual explanation for sub-optimal outcomes.
*in-joke here if you have read the book

I proffer no conspiracy theory.
But all the incentives are there for making the system what it is, ie, corrupt
& geared towards earning yacht payments rather than justice.

In a recent case, I came upon a letter from a lawyer for one party (siding with the
plaintiff) to a newly hired lawyer for a defendant. (The prior lawyer had to be
replaced because she became a judge.) In the letter, the one lawyer lamented
to the new lawyer that she was late in profiting from this long lasting case.
Clearly, this isn't conspiratorial, but it shows the common attitude that clients are
there to be fleeced. One can also hear such things if one listens carefully while
sitting in the halls outside courtroom where lawyers congregate & consult.
Most often, one hears about those despised "pro se" / "pro per" types.

 

[exchemist]

I'm not familiar with that comic....er....graphic novel.

I proffer no conspiracy theory.
But all the incentives are there for making the system what it is, ie, corrupt
& geared towards earning yacht payments rather than justice.

In a recent case, I came upon a letter from a lawyer for one party (siding with the
plaintiff) to a newly hired lawyer for a defendant. (The prior lawyer had to be
replaced because she became a judge.) In the letter, the one lawyer lamented
to the new lawyer that she was late in profiting from this long lasting case.
Clearly, this isn't conspiratorial, but it shows the common attitude that clients are
there to be fleeced. One can also hear such things if one listens carefully while
sitting in the halls outside courtroom where lawyers congregate & consult.
Most often, one hears about those despised "pro se" / "pro per" types.

Yes that I can agree with. The system lends itself to obscurity and there is no doubt that since lawyers are paid by timewriting, the longer the case the more lucrative it will be.

Hope I'm still eligible for a bacon sandwich.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes that I can agree with. The system lends itself to obscurity and there is no doubt that since lawyers are paid by timewriting, the longer the case the more lucrative it will be.

Hope I'm still eligible for a bacon sandwich.

 

[exchemist]

Thanks. Looks appetising - apart from the mayonnaise, but one must not quibble.
Maybe I should send you a photo of my apple and raspberry crumble with oatmeal. Was v good last night.