Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

"Gay Cake" row goes to European Courts


Eldorado
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Phaeton80 said:

Yeah well, their ego bruises extremely quickly. Lets not beat around the bush here, the LHBTQ community is very aware their 'plight' is 'hot', trending. They know full well everyone even remotely unaccomodating to their desires and needs will get outcast, will get an extreme lashback.

Im pretty fed up with that behaviour.

:lol:  I have seen people claiming to be christian act the same way, accusing people of bashing them and being disrespectful.  It think there is even a thread on here about terrorism aimed at christians around the world.  It is a bad habit that has been fostered by our society to make everyone feel like they are somehow a victim so that they are more emotional and thus more easily manipulated.  And it is a societal thing, not just religious or political, though both those groups take extreme advantage of it.

P.S.  I have even heard middle aged white men complain that the world is now against them because they are white males.  Victimhood at its worst.

Edited by Desertrat56
P.S.
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres a real difference between the two though.

You and I can criticize Islam and Christianity in the media and get support for doing that. Being anti religion is (extremely) socially acceptable.

Try being critical towards anything gay, however nuanced your points are, you will be branded a backward bigot, being reminded about the fact 'were living in the 21st century'..

Disclaimer: I am not against gays, people should be free to do as they please as long as they're not hurting anyone or otherwise impacting people negatively. But the agressive character assassinations on anyone who dares to stand critical towards this gay hype being stuffed down our combined throats is utterly ridiculous.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2019 at 8:34 PM, ExpandMyMind said:

I'm not arguing for or against this point of view. I'm arguing against this claim:

It absolutely does. The Equality Act (2010) is a consolidation of many previous protective acts, including:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidance

It specifically states that consumers are offered the same protections as employees:

https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights

You are absolutely wrong. 

Now, there is an argument to be made that refusing to decorate this cake is also discrimination, but it's far more complicated a subject than altogether refusing service to homosexuals. This is why I haven't commented on it. It's without a doubt discrimination of a sort and completely abhorrent, but perhaps not discrimination that is covered by existing laws. I'll wait and see what the courts decide.

It should be covered by moral hazard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Phaeton80 said:

Theres a real difference between the two though.

You and I can criticize Islam and Christianity in the media and get support for doing that. Being anti religion is (extremely) socially acceptable.

Try being critical towards anything gay, however nuanced your points are, you will be branded a backward bigot, being reminded about the fact 'were living in the 21st century'..

The real real difference is that religion is a choice and sexual orientation is not. Criticising someone for a conscious choice is very different from criticising someone for who they are, as dictated by their DNA.

Edited by ExpandMyMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

The real real difference is that religion is a choice and sexual orientation is not. Criticising someone for a conscious choice is very different from criticising someone for who they are. 

 

This is ofcourse true, the two are different in the sense you describe here. That doesnt mean however, the LHBTQ community should be accomodated without limit, and it also doesnt mean someone cant be critical towards the, almost marketing- level hyped image promoting being gay is cool.. (not in the sense of 'allright', but in the sense of 'I wanna be like that').

I actually think theres a real possibility teens.. think 12 to 17.. could want to 'try on' a LHBTQ identity just to get some positive attention, because 'its cool'. Point being, theres nothing wrong with being gay, but the present hyped, unrelenting promotion of all that is gay is not healthy, imho.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phaeton80 said:

 

What a ridiculous comment.

I wonder how you would have reacted if it was indeed a Muslim bakery who refused service like that. Somehow Id wager you wouldnt have been defending them like you did here.

It’s not a ridiculous comment based on a video I watched of gay activists in my state (a state where a Christian bakery was driven out of business due to legal fees because they wouldn’t bake a cake for a gay wedding) and the state attorney refused to press charges. It seems not all religions are under equal consideration by the law over here. That’s the basis of my comment.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, OverSword said:

It’s not a ridiculous comment based on a video I watched of gay activists in my state (a state where a Christian bakery was driven out of business due to legal fees because they wouldn’t bake a cake for a gay wedding) and the state attorney refused to press charges. It seems not all religions are under equal consideration by the law over here. That’s the basis of my comment.

 

Oh yeah Islam is getting a real royal treatment..

Come on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Also, it’s such a ridiculous comment that it’s got a heart rating.

to answer how I would have reacted had it been a Muslim baker who was targeted,  my reaction would have been identical as I know damn well this gay activist was just stirring a kettle. 

I challenge you to find one anti Muslim post by me you little twit. Now go eat some gafeltafish or whatever it is you do when you’re not trying to feel superior to we unenlightened non egalitarian types.


Well that escalated quickly.. Got manperiod?

Holy h*ll. :lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Phaeton80 said:

On a more general note; qaint we should all respect the LHBTQ community.. but the LHBTQ community herself immediately attacks anyone who doesnt comply with their desires / needs.

They could just respect the owners religious views and simply ask a different bakery.

 

 

H as well now? What's that? Why don't they just put in a few vowels, then they could make it a proper acronym.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Phaeton80 said:

 

Oh yeah Islam is getting a real royal treatment..

Come on.

My state is very liberal 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Phaeton80 said:


Well that escalated quickly.. Got manperiod?

Holy h*ll. :lol:

Yeah sorry. I deleted it before you posted this. And yes I’m having a bit of a man period. Tore a muscle in my calf and am non mobile for the last couple of days.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, skliss said:

Except that my friend who lives in a very Muslim area of the U.S. has said that when she's in a store and the check out clerk is Muslim, if she buys a pork product they have to have another cashier come over and switch with the Muslim cashier to  scan the product and then they switch back. Same with alcohol, etc.She said it holds up the lines and is a big pain in the a$$. And there are other accommodations like that made all the time in her area.

Personally I would either fire her for being unwilling to do the job or reassign her to a job stocking the shelves. 

Ridiculous. Modern processes have rendered the medievil religious fears of pork obsolete. 

Edited by OverSword
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

H as well now? What's that? Why don't they just put in a few vowels, then they could make it a proper acronym.

Here we go...

 

vlfMAXPg_o.gif

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (IP: Staff) ·
On 8/15/2019 at 1:43 PM, Eldorado said:

"A case involving a Christian bakery, which refused to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage, has been referred to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

"Gareth Lee tried but failed to order the £36.50 cake at Ashers bakery in Belfast in May 2014.

"The company declined the order as it was "at odds" with its beliefs."

Full report at the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-49350891

And at the Belfast Telegraph: https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ashers-gay-cake-case-goes-to-the-european-court-38404670.html

 

On 8/15/2019 at 7:09 PM, rashore said:

I hadn't heard of this case before today and was curious about the five years thing as well... It's been going on so long because Ashers lost the first case, and first appeal.. but won the Supreme Court last October. And now Mr. Lee and the group he is working with is filing up from that Supreme Court decision to the European courts.

Apparently so far it's been rather expensive too. Here's an article from 2018 about it: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-45789759

 

Sorry to quote myself on this one.. but wanted to include the older link too.

I am in the U.S., and might not be able to access stuff as well as some of our members of the area might be able to. Anyone able to dig up court records on this case from when it kicked off in 2014?

I'm having a suspicion of maybe considering this gentleman is an activist, perhaps he might have had a notion of the bakeries religious inclination prior to making his cake order? And he has had the largesse of a group to help pay those legal bills along... I got absolutely nothing to support my notion, so please bust me out if I am wrong, all I get are some of the same news links that pretty much restate what's in the above quote sources.

Being in the U.S., I've had the misfortune of being really skeptical and sour sometimes where litigation like this are involved. Sometimes justly, sometimes totally not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, rashore said:

 

Sorry to quote myself on this one.. but wanted to include the older link too.

I am in the U.S., and might not be able to access stuff as well as some of our members of the area might be able to. Anyone able to dig up court records on this case from when it kicked off in 2014?

I'm having a suspicion of maybe considering this gentleman is an activist, perhaps he might have had a notion of the bakeries religious inclination prior to making his cake order? And he has had the largesse of a group to help pay those legal bills along... I got absolutely nothing to support my notion, so please bust me out if I am wrong, all I get are some of the same news links that pretty much restate what's in the above quote sources.

Being in the U.S., I've had the misfortune of being really skeptical and sour sometimes where litigation like this are involved. Sometimes justly, sometimes totally not.

The 2018 Supreme Court Judgement PDF: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0020-judgment.pdf

Press summary PDF: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2017-0020-press-summary.pdf

Edited by Eldorado
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (IP: Staff) ·
2 minutes ago, Eldorado said:

Thank you so much El. Something for me to chew over during coffee in the morning :tu:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

The real real difference is that religion is a choice and sexual orientation is not. Criticising someone for a conscious choice is very different from criticising someone for who they are, as dictated by their DNA.

The common view that people are born gay is a faulty narrative that goes unchallenged in the media. Probably because people dont want to attract onto themselves the grief they will get. This form of group think doing the rounds is not backed up by science.

What is promoted as the `gay gene` is actually a foetal growth acceleration gene found in segments of the population where the degree of genetic diversity is low. It gives young children an early height advantage (although that doesnt necessarily translate into an unusually tall adult). There is a statistical anomaly where its found in 40% of gay people but thats not causation, its a correlation.

The current position in psychology is that homosexuality is a problem with the persons identity. It has been removed as a disorder, but that is due to social/political pressure not findings saying it isn't an identity disorder. It arises as a result of a young child developing the wrong identity for their biological gender.

Boys being brought up to be girls, girls being brought up to be boys, parental abuse trying to mess up the identity of the child, man hating and female hating parents, are all causes. A young child might have a biological gender but their identity is something that develops later.

The development of identity (for the right or wrong gender) or the lack of identity development both impact the brain. The identity brain neurons wrongly gained or missing cannot simply be repaired by a psychologist when they are an adult. The reason being is the brain has lost most of its plasticity. Additionally, the drugs and stem cell treatments that might fix homosexuality during the future haven't yet been developed.

Choosing to actually engage in a gay relationship is a choice. A person has to consent to it after all. Lets not forget that in the Bible the sin is not being attracted to the same sex, but choosing to act on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RabidMongoose said:

The common view that people are born gay is a faulty narrative that goes unchallenged in the media. Probably because people dont want to attract onto themselves the grief they will get. This form of group think doing the rounds is not backed up by science.

What is promoted as the `gay gene` is actually a foetal growth acceleration gene found in segments of the population where the degree of genetic diversity is low. It gives young children an early height advantage (although that doesnt necessarily translate into an unusually tall adult). There is a statistical anomaly where its found in 40% of gay people but thats not causation, its a correlation.

The current position in psychology is that homosexuality is a problem with the persons identity. It has been removed as a disorder, but that is due to social/political pressure not findings saying it isn't an identity disorder. It arises as a result of a young child developing the wrong identity for their biological gender.

Boys being brought up to be girls, girls being brought up to be boys, parental abuse trying to mess up the identity of the child, man hating and female hating parents, are all causes. A young child might have a biological gender but their identity is something that develops later.

The development of identity (for the right or wrong gender) or the lack of identity development both impact the brain. The identity brain neurons wrongly gained or missing cannot simply be repaired by a psychologist when they are an adult. The reason being is the brain has lost most of its plasticity. Additionally, the drugs and stem cell treatments that might fix homosexuality during the future haven't yet been developed.

Choosing to actually engage in a gay relationship is a choice. A person has to consent to it after all. Lets not forget that in the Bible the sin is not being attracted to the same sex, but choosing to act on it. 

Seriously, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. It would be only embarrassing if your views weren't so hateful, ignorant and dangerous.

What an absolute plonker. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Seriously, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. It would be only embarrassing if your views weren't so hateful, ignorant and dangerous.

What an absolute plonker. 

Thank you for that carefully reasoned response, ExpandMyMind. :( 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

Thank you for that carefully reasoned response, ExpandMyMind. :( 

He's spewing nonsense that has been disproved by science for decades. So forgotten and ridiculed are some of his views that I'm genuinely surprised that anyone can still believe such things in 2019. Even his misguided opinion on gender is increasingly being shown to have a biological, not merely environmental, explanation.

He even states that psychology sees homosexuality as an 'identity problem' (it doesn't - it views it as neither a problem nor an identity issue), then moves right on to conflate sexual preference and gender.

And he offers no evidence to support his opinions. In short, he has absolutely no ****ing idea what he's talking about - at all - and it would be a waste of time to argue with a pseudo intellectual of this magnitude.

But then, if you read his last sentence, all becomes clear.

'Do not argue with a fool. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience'.

Edited by ExpandMyMind
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

The common view that people are born gay is a faulty narrative that goes unchallenged in the media. Probably because people dont want to attract onto themselves the grief they will get. This form of group think doing the rounds is not backed up by science.

What is promoted as the `gay gene` is actually a foetal growth acceleration gene found in segments of the population where the degree of genetic diversity is low. It gives young children an early height advantage (although that doesnt necessarily translate into an unusually tall adult). There is a statistical anomaly where its found in 40% of gay people but thats not causation, its a correlation.

The current position in psychology is that homosexuality is a problem with the persons identity. It has been removed as a disorder, but that is due to social/political pressure not findings saying it isn't an identity disorder. It arises as a result of a young child developing the wrong identity for their biological gender.

Boys being brought up to be girls, girls being brought up to be boys, parental abuse trying to mess up the identity of the child, man hating and female hating parents, are all causes. A young child might have a biological gender but their identity is something that develops later.

The development of identity (for the right or wrong gender) or the lack of identity development both impact the brain. The identity brain neurons wrongly gained or missing cannot simply be repaired by a psychologist when they are an adult. The reason being is the brain has lost most of its plasticity. Additionally, the drugs and stem cell treatments that might fix homosexuality during the future haven't yet been developed.

Choosing to actually engage in a gay relationship is a choice. A person has to consent to it after all. Lets not forget that in the Bible the sin is not being attracted to the same sex, but choosing to act on it. 

^Claims science proves him right. 

Not a single source in all that drivel. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

The common view that people are born gay is a faulty narrative

Is that just your opinion or can you qualify that statement?

7 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

What is promoted as the `gay gene` is actually a foetal growth acceleration gene found in segments of the population where the degree of genetic diversity is low. It gives young children an early height advantage (although that doesnt necessarily translate into an unusually tall adult). There is a statistical anomaly where its found in 40% of gay people but thats not causation, its a correlation.

There has yet to be found a sexuality gene.  Science points to it being a combination of genetic factors, but it is still being researched.

Where are you getting this stuff from?

7 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

The current position in psychology is that homosexuality is a problem with the persons identity. It has been removed as a disorder, but that is due to social/political pressure not findings saying it isn't an identity disorder. It arises as a result of a young child developing the wrong identity for their biological gender.

Seriously?  Jesus, I think you need to head on over to the alternative history forum and present yourself as proof of time travel, Sigmund Freud in da house!

Show me one serious psychologist that cites sexuality as a disorder!

7 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

Boys being brought up to be girls, girls being brought up to be boys, parental abuse trying to mess up the identity of the child, man hating and female hating parents, are all causes. A young child might have a biological gender but their identity is something that develops later.

You are confused.  If a boy is brought up as a girl doesn’t then mean they will start liking boys, and if said boy still likes girls doesn’t make them lesbian.  Gender identity is not a determining factor for sexuality.  Where are you getting this stuff from?  None of those things causes Gays.

8 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

Choosing to actually engage in a gay relationship is a choice. A person has to consent to it after all. Lets not forget that in the Bible the sin is not being attracted to the same sex, but choosing to act on it. 

Choosing any form of relationship could be seen to be a choice.  Your preference in a sexual partners gender is absolutely not a choice.

Some evidence linked here would be nice, although personally I doubt you’ll be back.  If I had posted that response I would have deleted my account and checked into Nazi’s Anonymous.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grey Area said:

1. Is that just your opinion or can you qualify that statement?

2. There has yet to be found a sexuality gene.  Science points to it being a combination of genetic factors, but it is still being researched. Where are you getting this stuff from?

3. Show me one serious psychologist that cites sexuality as a disorder!

4. You are confused.  If a boy is brought up as a girl doesn’t then mean they will start liking boys, and if said boy still likes girls doesn’t make them lesbian.  Gender identity is not a determining factor for sexuality.  Where are you getting this stuff from? None of those things causes Gays.

1. Simple logic tells you that a baby has no sexual desires. That doesnt kick in until puberty.

2. Behavioural psychology is where it comes from. Biologists and psychologists can together tell you an awful lot about a species by examining its skeletons.

Males smaller than the females: There is a high level of genetic diversity in the species and a low prevalence of homosexuality. Spiders, fish, and birds, are good examples. Basically, species going around in huge groups where there is little chance of interbreeding with a relative.

Males a little bigger than the females: There is a moderate amount of genetic diversity in the species and a moderate prevalence of homosexuality. Zebra are a good example. Basically a species going around in the 1000s so there is some chance of interbreeding but its still quite low.

Males massive compared to the females: There is a low amount of genetic diversity in the species and a high prevalence of homosexuality. Great apes are a good example. These species go around in extended family groups of a few dozen meaning all the sex going on is between relatives. An evolved trait to make sure a male ape in these extended family groups gets the breeding rights is one that results in it being born with a height advantage over its colleagues. That is the foetal growth spurt gene and it has evolved in several such species including apes and humans. It puts the individual at high risk of developing diabetes later in life and being homosexual. The reason for this is it creates a foetal growth spurt by making the organism more sensitive to glycogen in its blood stream. As a result sugar gets stored, Growth Hormone increases due to the low sugar, the individual gets born with a height advantage, but with its other hormones including insulin out of whack. It causes males and females to look a bit androgynous. I would argue that sets them up for people projecting the wrong identity onto them and that this is the cause of homosexuality.

3. Look back at the history of the DSM. Also investigate why it was removed and you will discover it wasn't due to scientific evidence, but political pressure. In fact the vote to remove it from the DSM only just narrowly passed.

4. The exact mechanism for girls is the girl wanting to feel special about herself, her growing up in a family environment demeaning to women, and because she wants to feel special about herself she therefore rejects a feminine identity. Something similar happens with boys but the other way around. All people have some narcissism in their personalities, in the right culture that narcissism is used to make them adopt the wrong gender identity. And sexuality is totally plastic too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.