‘Gay cake’ controversy: Supreme Court rules in favour of Christian bakery

‘Gay cake’ controversy: Supreme Court rules in favour of Christian bakery Bakery owners Daniel and Amy McArthur
BREAKING NEWS

 

The UK’s highest court has ruled that a Northern Ireland bakery’s refusal to make a cake with a message supporting same-sex marriage was not discriminatory.

The Supreme Court found today that the Christian owners of Ashers bakery did not discriminate against a customer and did not refuse to bake the cake because of the customer’s sexual orientation, religious belief or political opinion.

Bakery owners Daniel and Amy McArthur have been involved in the legal dispute since 2014, when gay rights activist Gareth Lee sued the company for refusing to bake a cake with the slogan ‘Support Gay Marriage’, on grounds of sexual orientation and political beliefs.

Mr Lee won his case initially in the country court and then at the Northern Ireland Court of Appeal, which prompted the couple last year to launch an appeal in the UK Supreme Court.

As he arrived outside the Supreme Court for the start of the case which began in May, Ashers’ general manager Daniel McArthur said: “We didn’t say no because of the customer; we’d served him before, we’d serve him again.

“It was because of the message. But some people want the law to make us support something with which we disagree.”

This morning, the UK Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favour of the appeal stating that there were no grounds for discrimination in refusing to bake the cake.

The president of the Supreme Court, Lady Hale ruled that the bakers did not refuse to fulfil Mr. Lee’s order because of his sexual orientation.

“They would have refused to make such a cake for any customer, irrespective of their sexual orientation,” she said.

“Their objection was to the message on the cake, not to the personal characteristics of Mr Lee.”

She added: “Accordingly, this court holds that there was no discrimination on the ground of the sexual orientation of Mr Lee.”

The controversial case, which has lasted for over 4 years, has raised new questions about the role of conscientious objection and individual freedom.