Let us consider the case of the Ashers family bakery in Belfast which, in 2014, refused to make a cake. Or as some would have it, a ‘gay cake’, although that’s obviously ridiculous because all cakes are quite gay. This one, though, was requested by Gareth Lee, a local gay rights activist, who wanted it to have a picture of Bert and Ernie from Sesame Street on it, under the slogan ‘SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE’, as the centrepiece of an event organised to do just that. On the basis that they were devout Christians, however, the family running this family bakery refused. And so, sore affronted, Lee sued. Really, if anybody ought to be suing here it’s Bert and Ernie, who are simply two grown puppets who share a house and should be free to define themselves however they please. They’re in America, though, so maybe they didn’t hear about it.
Last year, a court decided that the McArthurs, who run Ashers, had, indeed, discriminated against Lee by refusing the cake. This week, the Court of Appeal finally decided that, yes indeed, discrimination occurred. All in all, a hell of a fuss about a cake. Or more accurately, about no cake.
Melanie McDonagh and Peter Tatchell discuss the ‘gay cake’ ruling
It goes all over the place, this. Every theme, every line of thought twists back on to itself. If there is a free speech angle, for example (and I’m pretty sure there is), in which direction does it go? Was Lee being denied free speech because they wouldn’t make his cake? Or were the McArthurs being denied free speech because they were having to write words they didn’t want to? Some have suggested it has been a case about gay rights, although it might not have been, because the McArthurs would presumably have refused to make the same cake for a straight person, too.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in