‘I’ve Changed My Mind’: Homosexual Rights Activist Now Supports Fined Christian Bakers

AsherBELFAST, Northern Ireland — A homosexual rights activist states that he has changed his mind and now supports the rights of a Christian bakery that was fined last year for declining to print the phrase “support gay marriage” on a cake. He says that while discrimination against people is wrong, rejecting ideas is indeed lawful.

As previously reported, in May 2014, Ashers Baking Company in Newtonabbey—named after Genesis 49:20—was approached by a same-sex “marriage” supporter to bake a cake that was to feature the phrase, as well as the logo for the homosexual advocacy group QueerSpace. According to the Belfast Telegraph, the cake was for an event in observance of the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia.

Karen McArthur, the mother of manager Daniel McArthur, 24, initially accepted the order as she didn’t want the man to feel embarrassed. But as the matter was discussed with other family members, it was agreed upon that they could not go through with putting the message on the cake in good conscience before God. Daniel McArthur told reporters that the company contacted the customer and offered a refund, explaining that same-sex “marriage” is against their Christian beliefs.

However, the customer, Gareth Lee, soon reported Ashers Baking Company to the Equality Commission of Northern Ireland, which in turn sent a warning to to McArthur, stating that he and his bakery had discriminated against Lee.

Last November, the Commission ordered the bakery to pay compensation or face legal action. As the McArthur’s refused, the case moved forward in court. Judge Isobel Brownlie then ruled against the McArthurs, declaring them “guilty of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation,” and ordered the bakers to pay a fine equating to nearly $800 U.S. dollars.

Now, two days before the case is to be considered in an appeals court, a prominent homosexual activist who previously condemned Ashers is defending the business.

“I have changed my mind,” writes Peter Tatchell in a piece for The Guardian. “Much as I wish to defend the gay community, I also want to defend freedom of conscience, expression and religion.”

  • Connect with Christian News

He said that he views the case differently because of the wording that was requested on the cake, and said that businesses shouldn’t have to print messages that violate their conscience.

“[Lee’s] 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,” Tatchell wrote.

Asher’s Bakery has stated that it is willing to serve homosexuals in general—one would not know about another’s sexual behavior unless they had requested a cake for such reasons—but should not be forced to decorate cakes with messages that urge others to “support gay marriage” in violation of their faith.

Tatchell said that he disagrees with Brownlie’s ruling, as he believes that it reads more into the law than was intended.

“There was never an intention that this law should compel people to promote political ideas with which they disagreed,” he contended.

“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?” Tatchell asked. “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.”

He separated discrimination against people from the rejection of objectionable ideas.

“In my view, it is an infringement of freedom to require businesses to aid the promotion of ideas to which they conscientiously object,” Tatchell said. “Discrimination against people should be unlawful, but not against ideas.”

A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Emmanuel

    Some folks don’t like the consequences and the results of their actions. A gay baker might have to make a cake that he/she does not agree with now.

    • Peter Leh

      yep… that is bus 101.

  • The Last Trump

    Well, at least ONE liberal stopped drinking the hateful, freedom loathing and intolerance inducing Kool-Aid and is finally beginning to wake up.

    • FoJC_Forever

      Why does everyone pick on Kool-Aid? I loved drinking it when I was a child.

      • The Last Trump

        Me too! 🙂
        Alas, see “the Reverend Jim Jones”
        Ruined it for everybody… 🙁

        • FoJC_Forever

          Long time ago, and not the most horrendous thing false religion has done. False religion masquerading as Christianity has destroyed entire cultures, using God as an excuse to murder and pillage.

          If people didn’t keep referring to it, then Kool-Aid wouldn’t be used in a derogatory manner. The Kool-Aid wasn’t the problem, it was the false doctrine being taught to the people.

          • hytre64

            The poison filled Kool-Aid is a good metaphor for those who would have us drink poisonous legislation/doctrine while passing it off as something sweet.

      • mic1969

        also because it is basically colored sugar-water. Oh, wait,…, that’s Starbucks coffee, too. …. never mind.

    • http://www.bing.com/ Martin Smit

      Loud condemnation for months, and retraction for a day. Does this undo the harm? How can one undo the harm of sin?

    • acontraryview

      It would appear, however, that you are still drinking the hateful, freedom loathing, and intolerance inducing Kool-Aid as relates to homosexuals.

  • Michael C

    I agree with Tatchell’s assessment and am glad that he has taken the effort to better understand the circumstances of this case. I don’t know Ireland’s laws but I doubt that this bakery would’ve been found guilty of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation here in the States.

    This case bears more similarity to the cases involving Hands on Originals in Kentucky or Azucar Bakery in Colorado than it does Arlene’s Flowers and Masterpiece Cakeshop.

  • WorldGoneCrazy

    “[Lee’s] 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,” Tatchell wrote.

    And that is the point. Had the gay man come in and asked for a regular birthday cake, the order would have been filled and I am sure had been filled many times. This is something that so many over zealous, practically religious, gay activists cannot fathom.

    Good for Mr. Tatchell! Sanity prevails for a brief moment in time. Perhaps it is becoming apparent to some that intolerance for the sake of “tolerance” is logically and morally self-refuting.

    • nowaRINO

      Give Peter Tatchell six months and he will change his mind again. He does that to get his name in the news and blogs.

  • acontraryview

    I disagree with the ruling in this case. Putting a specific message on a cake is not something I believe the baker should have been required to do.

  • FoJC_Forever

    The Wicked fight and rage to get their way, then try to act nice and kind after they have destroyed many lives.

    Follow Jesus, find Truth.

  • The Guest

    “I have changed my mind,” writes Peter Tatchell in a piece for The Guardian. “Much as I wish to defend the gay community, I also want to defend freedom of conscience, expression and religion.”

    Thank you. ‘Freedom’ is a rare thing these days, and no matter what side we are on, no matter our views or different beliefs, we can all come together on this one thing.

  • james rallis

    Sin is still sin…

    • David & Jonathan

      Homosexuality has never been a sin… Read the gospel

      • mic1969

        Homosexuality has always been a sin… Read both Old and New Testaments, including the gospels.

        • David & Jonathan

          I read them all. The reference to homosexuality was pure within a certain context.

          Do yourself a favor and read Leviticus 15:24:
          ‘If a man has sexual relations with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean.

          And compare with Leviticus 18:
          19 “You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness while she is in her menstrual uncleanness.
          29 For everyone who does any of these abominations, the persons who do them shall be cut off from among their people.

          Quite a difference don’t you think?

          Read up on leviticus 18 and 20, the whole chapters. See the references to Molek, as well as the fact that the word Toevah (half-correctly translated to abomination) refers to idolatry.

          The context of Leviticus 18 and 20 is sex rituals in the context of baal/molek worshipping. Nothing else.

          Read the last words of Jesus before he died on the cross:

          John 19:26 When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” 27 Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.

      • james rallis

        Sodom and Gomorrah ….

        • David & Jonathan

          Was about greed, grave injustice and inhospitality. No other reference to s&g in the bible tells you that homosexuality was the sin of S&G. Same goes for the copyright holders of that story (judaism). They understand the story to be about grave injustice, inhospitality, the rape of strangers. And have a look at judges 19&20. Same story, actual rape of a stranger and same consequence, city destroyed. But now it is about heterosecual rape. But the consequence is the same. Surely you agree with me that judges can not mean heterosexuality is condemned. That means that homosexuality is also not condemned is S&G. It is about the rape of strangers coming to their cities as an ultimate form of inhospitality….

      • hytre64

        Homosexual inclination a sin – No; only a temptation to sin.
        Homosexual activity – Yes a sin.
        Read the First chapter of the Epistle to the Romans.
        Read Leviticus 18:21-22.
        Read Leviticus 20:13
        Read 1 Cor 6:9-11…

        Ignore the scripture or twist them at your own peril.

        • David & Jonathan

          Only untwisting what has been twisted for 1600 years. Leviticus 18 and 20 have nothing to do with ordinary homosexuality. It deals with homosexual acts in the context baal and molek worshipping: Idolatry.
          Similar for Romans 1. The context is even spelled out.
          The other verses do not say anything about homosexuality…

          Homosexuality has never been a sin. There are not many books on this planet as pro-gay as the bible. Read the gospel…, read the OT.

          We have David and Jonathan, we have Ruth and Naomi, we have Daniel and …., we have Jesus and his “beloved disciple” (the one who runs away naked with Jesus his arrest), we have the roman soldier and his toy boy. We have jesus confirming that homosexuals are born gay. We have Isaiah declaring that there will be a monument for gays in heaven, greater than having children … Etc. etc. etc.

  • April J

    Looks like less an example of a victorious Christian and more of an example of a homosexual being more understanding and respectful than most Christians will ever be of them.

  • Brian_Joness

    Gay people have their uncle Toms too

    • Sven2S47

      And lots of old aunties.