ECHR says Gareth Lee’s se agast bakery that refed to make ke wh ‘support gay marriage’ msage is admissible
Contents:
- THE ‘GAY KE’ FIGHT: WHY THE BAKERS HAD A RIGHT TO REFE THIS ORR
- WHAT WAS THE ‘GAY CAKE’ CASE ALL ABOUT?
- 'GAY KE' BAKERY DISCRIMATED AGAST CLIENT OVER SEXUAL ORIENTATN, URT TOLD
- ‘GAY KE’ ROW: MAN LOS SEVEN-YEAR BATTLE AGAST BELFAST BAKERY
- SUPREME COURT CIS COLORADO GAY WEDDG KE SE: A TIMELE OF EVENTS
- SUPREME URT SIS WH BAKER WHO REFED TO MAKE GAY WEDDG KE
- GAY WEDDG KE LG REAFFIRMS THAT BS N’T DISCRIMATE
THE ‘GAY KE’ FIGHT: WHY THE BAKERS HAD A RIGHT TO REFE THIS ORR
* gay cake case wiki *
And the story of how the icg on that ke beme, bizarrely, an exhib the ntemporary culture 2014 Gareth Lee, an LGBT activist, asked Ashers bakery Belfast to make a ke rated wh imag of the Same Street puppets Bert and Ernie, together wh the slogan: “Support gay marriage”.
Photograph: Charl McQuillan/Getty ImagHad Ashers refed to serve Lee bee he was gay, or bee of his support for same-sex marriage, then I n see why would be guilty of discrimatn. Other Christians prosecuted for preachg hatred clu Michael Overd, nvicted at Bristol crown urt of quotg homophobic passag om the Bible, and Shawn Hol, fed for preachg on the streets of Glasgow that gays served the “wrath of God” that Christians themselv are slow to censor.
Siarly, Christian B&B owners should not be able to turn away gays, even if they believe that homosexualy is a treatment, however, is not the same as forcg someone to exprs particular views.
WHAT WAS THE ‘GAY CAKE’ CASE ALL ABOUT?
A Colorado baker who had won a narrow U.S. Supreme Court victory over his refal to make a weddg ke for a gay uple on Thursday lost his appeal of a lg a separate se that he vlated a state anti-discrimatn law by not makg a ke to celebrate a genr transn. * gay cake case wiki *
That opn, also wrten by Kennedy, exprsed rpect for those wh relig objectns to gay marriage.
“Our society has e to the regnn that gay persons and gay upl nnot be treated as social outsts or as ferr digny and worth, ” he wrote Monday. “At the same time the relig and philosophil objectns to gay marriage are protected views and some stanc protected forms of exprsn, ” Kennedy wrote, addg that the “ntral nsiratn to which Phillips was entled was promised here.
“The oute of s like this other circumstanc mt awa further elaboratn the urts, all the ntext of regnizg that the disput mt be rolved wh tolerance, whout undue disrpect to scere relig beliefs, and whout subjectg gay persons to digni when they seek goods and servic an open market, ” the opn stat. “It’s about the right of gay people to receive equal service.
'GAY KE' BAKERY DISCRIMATED AGAST CLIENT OVER SEXUAL ORIENTATN, URT TOLD
Today we brg you a slice of ke or two and ask, what happened the ntroversial ‘gay ke’ se and what do have to do wh human rights? Gareth Lee was a gay rights activist livg Northern Ireland. To celebrate the Northern Ireland anti-homophobia week and the growg mpaign favour of same-sex marriage, he wished to buy a ke wh the slogan ‘Support Gay Marriage’ and wh a picture of Bert and Ernie om Same Street on .
‘GAY KE’ ROW: MAN LOS SEVEN-YEAR BATTLE AGAST BELFAST BAKERY
Later urt she emphasised this was no way related to his beg gay; was that to produce the ke would be to promote same-sex marriage and this was ntrary to their valu.
The judge said there had been direct discrimatn on both grounds: Mr Lee had been refed the ke bee he was gay (sexual orientatn) and bee he supported same sex marriage (polil belief). It would be the same the other way round too – if gay bakery owners’ refed to make a ke wh the slogan “God s upon heterosexual marriage”, that would be unlawful discrimatn too, as Olivia Dobbie pots out her blog post. As the law stands, would only have been unlawful for the bakery owners to refe to make the ke for Gareth bee he was gay.
SUPREME COURT CIS COLORADO GAY WEDDG KE SE: A TIMELE OF EVENTS
Which begs the qutn, was the ke and the ia of gay marriage iced on , and not Gareth himself, that was beg discrimated agast?
For the origal ‘gay ke’ se judgment, click here.
The Evangelil Christian owners of a bakery that refed to make a gay-themed ke discrimated agast a client on grounds of his sexual orientatn, Northern Ireland’s high urt has heard. A lawyer for an LGBT activist sug the bakery, Ashers, said that “but for the word gay this orr would have been fulfilled”. ”Former Ashers ctomer Gareth Lee sued the bakery after reversed an agreement to bake a ke wh a pro-gay marriage msage.
SUPREME URT SIS WH BAKER WHO REFED TO MAKE GAY WEDDG KE
The bakery ially accepted the orr but 48 hours later hand back the payment to Lee, who had asked for a ke featurg the Same Street puppets Bert and had orred to mark last year’s electn of the first openly gay mayor Northern Ireland as well as to ci wh Internatnal Day agast Homophobia last said should have been obv to Ashers that the person makg the requt for an iced pro-gay marriage slogan was gay himself.
GAY WEDDG KE LG REAFFIRMS THAT BS N’T DISCRIMATE
“If you take the factual analysis, shorn of any meang, is the word gay the phrase that was the e of the differential treatment, ” the lawyer said. “It is clear that if the word gay had been replaced by the word heterosexual, the orr would have been accepted. A man has lost a seven-year legal battle agast a Belfast bakery that refed to make him a ke emblazoned wh the msage “support gay marriage” as the European urt of human rights led that his claim was admissible, promptg disappotment om gay rights Thursday the ECHR, by a majory cisn, said would not rensir the cisn of the UK supreme urt, which had overturned a £500 damag award imposed on Ashers bakery, which is n by evangelil refed to produce the ke, featurg the Same Street puppets Bert and Ernie, 2014 for Gareth Lee, who was a supporter of the mpaign to legalise same-sex marriage Northern Ireland.
Same-sex marriage was legalised Northern Ireland last the supreme urt judgment 2018, after s first hearg Northern Ireland, a Belfast unty urt and a urt of appeal had led that the pany discrimated agast Lee, who is gay, on the grounds of sexual ECHR said the claim was admissible bee the applint had not exprsly voked his rights unr the European nventn on human rights at any pot the domtic proceedgs and had relied solely on domtic said: “The supreme urt found on the facts of the se that the applint was not treated differently on acunt of his real or perceived sexual orientatn, but rather that the refal to supply the ke was bee of the fendants’ relig objectn to gay marriage.