Stewart Enters Gay Cake Debate
2 min read
Sir Patrick Stewart was recently asked where he stands regarding the debate over whether bakeries should be compelled to make cakes for gay couples.
His answer comes as a surprise to those who are aware of his position on gay marriage, which he supports.
The Ashers Baking Company, located in Northern Ireland, recently lost a judgment and owners of the company, the McArthur family, was required to pay £500 to Gay Rights Activist Gareth Lee after refusing to make a cake for Lee with the slogan “Support Gay Marriage.”
Stewart was asked for his opinion on the matter during an interview for BBC‘s Newsnight show. “Who has the right there,” asked Evan Davis, presenter on the show. “The couple who say we want you to put ‘Yes to Gay Marriage’ on the cake, or the people who have to make the cake, who say we don’t want to put that on the cake?”
It’s a “deliciously difficult subject,” said Stewart. “It was not because this was a gay couple that they objected; it was not because they were going to be celebrating some kind of marriage or agreement between them. It was the actual words on the cake that they objected to, because they found them offensive.
“And I would support their right to say ‘no this is personally offensive to my beliefs; I will not do it’. But I feel bad for them, that it cost them £600 or whatever.”
The McArthur family has appealed the ruling.
About The Author
Attention Posters: I comprehend that this is an inflammatory issue for many. Think before you post. Posters need to be civil and respectful to one another, even if they disagree. Especially if they disagree. I will remove posts (and posters) if things get out-of-hand. T’Bonz- TrekToday.
I agree with Sir Patrick. Unfortunately, in the US that makes me a “hater” and and “bigot”. Sad really…
I agree to agree with Mr Stewart on this. The bakery should not forced to put that text on the cake if they for personal reasons don’t want too.
Gareth Lee is free to choose another bakery that is willing to make such a cake for him.
This falls under free speech and the right to refuse.
Fortunately, Mr Stewart, like most (but not all) Brits really do believe in ‘Live and let live’… What he says makes perfect sense to me..
I would just have said “sorry, we don’t have image rights to use Bert and Ernie” and refused to make the cake. Simple. But the bakery and their solicitor chose to make the whole thing a religious belief / conscientous objection case which, in the current climate, they were never going to win. For once, Stewart has surprised me with his views on this. I thought he was far more of a trendy lefty than to have ever agreed with an individual’s right to object.
I don’t know if you’re in the US, but in the UK, it’s widely believed that Lee deliberately singled out the bakery to get his pound of flesh, along with publicity for his “cause”. Next to no one here believes he wasn’t well aware of what he was doing when he decided to use a locally well known Christian run bakery.
Is being “trendy” and/or “lefty” a negative in your opinion? What qualifies PS as a “trendy lefty”? Do “trendy lefty’s” all believe in the same things? How do you identify them? Just curious.
I am not against gay people, but I massively object against making Ernie & Bert a gay couple. There was nothing gay about them, they were the Odd Couple of Sesame Street, I loved these guys during my childhood, and I really really hate it when gay people turn a harmless entertainment for pre-school children (!) into supposed statements for gay marriage or gay lifestyle. Please choose idols that really were meant to be gay, but leave Ernie & Bert out of it. Same goes for Kirk & Spock, Janeway & Seven and every other pairing that is not gay.
By the way, isn’t it a sales man’s right to refuse service to a customer?
Not if it’s Politically Incorrect.
No problem! As long as I have the right to refuse service or employment to whiny christian filth, of course.
I support gay marriage but this is just silly and I agree with Sir Patrick Stewart.The baking company shouldn’t be forced to make a product they don’t want to make. So absurd.
Once again, Patrick Stewart demonstrates his impressive intellect and logical reasoning.
Yes, it is a gay person’s right to exist and be treated just like any other human being.
Yes, it is a shop owner’s right to refuse service.
End of subject, time to move along…
Well of course, this is how SJWs operate.
Exactly. And you do. You have the right to refuse service to anyone.
Yes Fred the Barbarian, that is exactly what is wanted by the (seemingly) few people (on both sides of this topic) who can actually discuss these type of situations in a reasonable and well considered manner. In arguing for the right of religious people to say “no, I can’t do this thing because it goes against the personal morals and ethics,” we also must work to protect the right of people such as yourself to disagree with and to openly express your opinions regarding the beliefs and values of others. If a religious person has the right to say “no, I don’t agree with or support this thing,” then non-religious people must also have the right to refer to millions of other people whom they have never met as “whiny, christian filth.” That’s called freedom. To quote a great Star Trek episode: “With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.” Freedom is also the thing that allows me the right to point out how sad it is that on a comment board filled with a number of well thought out and respectfully expressed opinions (especially a comment board on a Star Trek website, a series know for celebrating values such diversity, freedom, logic and compassion) your post is a rather glaring example of bigoted, narrow minded thinking. You have the right to say it, but I have the right to tell you, respectfully, how ugly what you’ve just said is.
Aren’t you glad you do? Too bad in Libworld it doesn’t work both ways
Kang is not surprised.
Kang is not finding “SJW” in Kang’s lexicon. Could you elucidate?
Britain does seem to have come to terms with gay people wanting to get married, be treated as human beings, and just plain exist better than oh, say, the United States.
Devil’s advocate…. there are aspects to this that many are not thinking about. Here are 2 separate points to ponder:
1) A large percentage of the US population is very rural. That baker that refuses service may be the only baker within a reasonable distance who could provide the service. If the baker next door won’t do it but the next one who would is an hour away, how do you feel as a customer?
2) This isn’t just about bakers or restaurant owners, think of other service industries like pharmacies, automotive repair, real estate, or any of a multitude of businesses that can pull the same thing. There are essential services that everybody needs to have access to, and by allowing owners to choose who they provide service to based on sex, race, religion, or orientation is effectively closing off access to groups of people.
Think Romulans.
Kang wholeheartedly supports your right to be an obnoxious douchebag.
Actually if that is the truth I have quite little respect for this ‘rights’ activist, and I kind of eared that this would be the case.
It has basically going from one side of the spectrum with minorities having little rights or respects, to everything having rights which have to be respected with people such as these trying to ‘bait’ those (in order for attention and perhaps money) they know will object because of personal reasons.
It really makes it more difficult for find a reasonable middle ground in which both sides accept that they have to give up something to be able to co exists with another but still be able to be themselves.
An essential service isn’t at stake here. The issue is whether or not someone should be forced to write a message they might disagree with, kind of like expecting a Klingon to write “Romulans rule!”
Short for Social Justice Warrior. These “SJWs” typically troll the internet blogosphere looking for “thought crimes” to persecute via doxxing and other forms of sustained harassment; although this article is a great example of a real-life SJW.
If you are interested, this is a great article on the subject:
http://thoughtcatalog.com/joshua-goldberg/2014/12/when-social-justice-warriors-attack-one-tumblr-users-experience/
This depends.
Kang cannot speak for the UK, but in the US there are protected classes: groups of people that are protected from discrimination by federal or state law. Government agencies, and to some extent businesses, cannot refuse them equal service. The Americans with Disabilities Act is a good example; the ADA made the handicapped and disabled a protected class and required public agencies and publicly accessible businesses to provide them equal access. They can only be refused service under specific circumstances, such as disruptive behavior, or if their service animals do not behave in accordance with the law (one cannot have a seeing-eye dog that bites children and poops on the floor, for instance).
There is much debate over how far this should be taken. For instance, Kang agrees that restaurants and shops should have the right to refuse service; but should that also give them the right to not provide access, like say wheelchair ramps? There is also the fact that these protected classes are minorities and typically historically discriminated against, either actively or passively. They may not have the economic clout to sway businesses with their dollars, the ideal method of persuasion in a free-market economy. This is where the courts come in, and where things get messy.
Kang favors the right of businesses to refuse service, and the right of customers to refuse to patronize the businesses in return. However, there are situations where this just does not seem to bring equilibrium. In such situations, intervention may be appropriate, but Kang thinks it should be carefully considered and then applied with the least restraint necessary.
Despite it’s size, the US does seem a very insular country. Conversely the UK is the proverbial melting pot of cultures… Not saying the UK is better, but surely all we all want is to get along! After all, Isn’t that the philosophy of Star Trek?
Who has turned Burt and Ernie gay? Does standing under a “Support Gay Marriage” poster supernaturally turn people (and hand puppets) gay? If Kang were to stand too long under a poster for Inglorious Basterds, would Kang turn into the Bear Jew?
Kang, you’re so wise…. I might consider you a deity and pronounce you god. Love your might tentacles.. yep, checked spelling on that one…. ahem
As the makers have always said, Bert and Ernie are neither gay nor straight. They are simply puppets….
Meanwhile, as of this time stamp, there are exactly five comments in the article about Nichelle Nichols’ stroke. Gotta have priorities.
Having said all that of course, this incident too place in the UK, so what the fun do I know!?
All this, and not a word about the Sexy Cakes skit Patrick Stewart did on Saturday Night Live?
(finally found it–screw you, NBC, with your take-downs)
http://www.rowsdowr.com/2010/07/12/patrick-stewart-sexy-cakes-snl-sketch-video/
So if your a Klingon bakery and happen to be the only bakery within 1000 light years, what’s a Romulan to do when he wants to throw a Romulan party? Keep in mind, at this point you’re all part of the same alliance and not separate empires.
If you are to take it down to cold hard logic, you’re giving the person who made a religious choice a trump card over someone who has no choice in who they are. Religion is not something you are born with, it is something you learn and choose. Sexuality is as core to a person as their skin colour, race, and whether or not they like licorice.
But hey, they got it all wrong anyway. It’s actually “God hates figs!” (Matthew 21:19).
Romulans wouldn’t do that. 😉
But Romulans DO rule. 🙂
I stand corrected 🙂
Okay, you’ll have to take this one up with Kang then.
Things are so divided in the US but I’d like to think that most people here also feel that Lee was singled out. It’s sad that people like him are basically being told that they are going to be fined or put out of business for sticking to their religious beliefs. It’s just not right. IMO.
I’m going to head over to a Christian bakery tomorrow to request a cake that reads HAIL SATAN in big gooey red icing and then sue the shit out of them when they refuse. ‘Cause, Equality.
I completely agree. The media even tried to smear a pizza shop owner for saying they wouldn’t cater a gay wedding because of their Christian beliefs. Is it coincidental that the same media source forgot to mention that the pizza shop doesn’t cater any weddings, gay or straight, and had no plan to start catering in the future? I think not.
I’m starting to get used to being called a bigot and a hater for things like this. If that’s the price I have to pay for speaking out against smear tactics undertaken against people because of their religious beliefs, then so be it. It’s pretty much come to the point where being called a bigot doesn’t mean anything anymore because people throw that accusation around so much anymore. It’s the same with being called a racist.
Unfortunately quite a few people, including many in the media, won’t move along until they’ve silenced those that they disagree with. 🙁
I think it’s interesting that the minorities who were once the victims of discrimination are now the bullies that are doing the discriminating. You’d think the gay community would be more willing to accept opposing viewpoints, considering their history.
I double dog dare you to go to a Muslim bakery and ask for a cake with a big picture of Muhammad on it. No, I TRIPLE DOG DARE YOU!
I’d upvote this, but I remember the Sexy Cakes sketch from 20 years ago and the scars have not healed.
I can see both sides of the argument. On one hand, it seems unreasonable to force someone to act against their morality (especially as they are a small business; big corporations are another matter). On the other hand, fuck ’em. In this case, when we say “beliefs” we are really talking about hate. Hatred should not be tolerated. Or are we also going to defend a white supremacist’s right not to make a bar mitzvah cake?
I’d do that too, but I’m afraid I wouldn’t make it past the IED in the parking lot.
lol! Unfortunately, you’d probably be right. 😛