Judges told law gives Christian bakers right to reject 'gay' message

gay-wedding-cake-rainbow-600

Judges on an appeals court bench in Northern Ireland have been told that Christian bakers do, in fact, have a right to reject a pro-homosexual message requested on a cake, under the nation's freedom of speech laws as well as the European Convention of Human Rights.

A four-day hearing on the case against Ashers Baking Company concluded on Thursday, and a ruling is expected in several weeks.

The fight goes directly to the heart of the pro-"gay" movement, and could answer how far homosexuals can go in forcing Christians to violate their faith under so-called non-discrimination laws.

While this case is in Northern Ireland, the same issue has arisen in the United States in several different evolutions, including bakers, photographers, venue owners and others being forced to promote homosexuality.

In the Ashers case, a lower court judge, Isobel Brownlie, found that Ashers had broken discrimination laws by refusing to prepare a cake for customer Gareth Lee that promoted homosexuality.

"Outlasting the Gay Revolution" spells out eight principles to help Americans with conservative moral values counter attacks on our freedoms of religion, speech and conscience by homosexual activists

The hearing had been scheduled to be held in February when John Larkin, the attorney general for Northern Ireland, abruptly asked for a delay so he could present arguments that it would be a violation of the constitutional protections on freedom of speech if the owners, the McArthur family, was forced to "express a view they disagree with."

He repeated the argument at the appellate court.

"No one should be forced to be the mouthpiece for someone else's views when they are opposed to their own – whether in print or in icing sugar," he said.

In an earlier preliminary hearing, Larkin said "there was a theological context to the way sexual orientation regulations were considered in the case," reported the Christian Institute, which has been representing the bakery.

"And judges led by Lord Chief Justice Sir Declan Morgan agreed there was a point of law that should be considered on the issue," according to the institute.

"The attorney general has decided to intervene, using his constitutional power to raise questions about the validity of the legislation used against the [bakery owners] McArthurs," Institute spokesman Simon Calvert noted. "And it is clear from the decision taken by the three judges, including the lord chief justice, that he has raised matters of importance."

The issue of the speech protections available under the European Convention on Human Rights also were raised in the case.

Larkin had explained the "issue of political and religious discrimination is direct" and the ramifications are "potentially enormous."

Testimony in the case at the lower court revealed the bakery owners didn't know, or care, about any customer's sexuality, but the requested message violated their Christian faith, and the European Convention on Human Rights gives them the right to refuse to put it on one of their cakes.

The owners recently got an unexpected boost when homosexual activist Peter Tatchell wrote in the London Guardian that while he originally condemned Ashers, he has changed his mind.

"I have changed my mind. Much as I wish to defend the gay community, I also want to defend freedom of conscience, expression and religion," he wrote.

He said the lower court's ruling that found Ashers breached Northern Ireland’s Equality Act and Fair Employment and Treatment Order, which "prohibit discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services on the respective grounds of sexual orientation and political opinion" perhaps wasn't the best result.

"It pains me to say this, as a long-time supporter of the struggle for LGBT equality in Northern Ireland, where same-sex marriage and gay blood donors remain banned. The equality laws are intended to protect people against discrimination. A business providing a public service has a legal duty to do so without discrimination based on race, gender, faith and sexuality.

"However, the court erred by ruling that [Gareth] Lee was discriminated against because of his sexual orientation and political opinions. … His cake request was refused not because he was gay, but because of the message he asked for. There is no evidence that his sexuality was the reason Ashers declined his order," he wrote.

Such a conclusion is a bad precedent, he said.

He continued: "This raises the question: should Muslim printers be obliged to publish cartoons of Mohammed? Or Jewish ones publish the words of a Holocaust denier? Or gay bakers accept orders for cakes with homophobic slurs? If the Ashers verdict stands it could, for example, encourage far-right extremists to demand that bakeries and other service providers facilitate the promotion of anti-migrant and anti-Muslim opinions. It would leave businesses unable to refuse to decorate cakes or print posters with bigoted messages."

During the four-day hearing:

Ashers' attorney David Scoffield said the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland, which prosecuted the bakers, was trying to make the case about Ashers discriminating on the basis of their own Christian beliefs. If this were true, he argued, any actions motivated by one's own beliefs – whether religious or non-religious – would be discriminatory.
Under questioning from the judges, ECNI's Robin Allen "admitted that there was no discussion between the McArthur family on the sexual orientation, beliefs or opinions of customer Gareth Lee."
Larkin warned the court that the county court ruling falls afoul of Northern Ireland's constitutional law.

See the Big List of Christian Coercion compiled by WND, where officials, business owners and others have been bludgeoned by the law, activists – even judges – for their faith.