LGBTQ Rights and Society

We had a similar case:

It does raise interesting points in a so-called free, open and democratic society.

The case was brought about as part of a wider LGBTQ campaign in Northern ireland — now the only part of the UK in which abortion is still illegal — so there's little doubt that had this particular baker agreed to make the cake, the campaigner would have gone elsewhere until he found someone who refused. (So I find his claims to 'exhaustion' as somewhat disingenuous — who much suffering is there in the absence of cake, and how much suffering when your cause is being funded by others? He might want to talk to rape victims about emotional exhaustion.)

What makes the case so difficult is the bakers do not refuse to serve a customer, they did not discriminate against an individual, they simply refused to endorse a message which they do not support, in this instance, gay marriage.

Would a Jewish baker, for example, be allowed to refuse to make a cake for a right-wing group celebrating Hitler's birthday?

Or how about a baker refusing to make a cake for the NRA, or celebrating the millionth sale of the A-whatever-5 assault rifle?

It opens up complex issues, and I was pleasantly surprised to see, in the UK case, Peter Tatchell, an outspoken LGBTQ activist, state that the bakery owners had the right to their opinion, even though he disagreed with their opposition to same-sex marriage. "Ashers did not refuse to serve him, let alone because of his sexuality. They simply refused to decorate his cake with a pro-gay message," he said in a statement. "That is their right in a free and democratic society."
I believe the LGBTQ community will ultimately win in the courts on everything they're seeking.
I believe the LGBTQ community will ultimately win in the courts on everything they're seeking.
Yes sicitety changes slow lijenthe turning of an aircraft carrier....our current conservative blowback will be short lived and progress will continue...just as it has for hundreds of years...much to the dismay if the dinosaurs
Yes society changes slow like the turning of an aircraft carrier...
I met an American lad who was crew on a US carrier. He said it was like a small city, there were places on the ship he'd never visited. One story he told was of a guy who cracked up, and was found hanging off the stern of the ship with a can of sardines. He was throwing the fish one by one into the ocean saying, "You're free!" Poor guy. I can understand his sentiment, at times.

And don't you sometimes feel you're in a little wooden boat, shouting "Not that way!"?

Another tale — the US carrier happened to arrive in a South African port at the same time as a Russian navy vessel. Cock-up in planning, somewhere down the line. Now if I were a conspiracy theorist I'd wonder if one side or t'other or both might use the opportunity to spy on the other, but worse than that, reports came back that sailors were ... gulp ... fraternising in the local bars! Good God, they were singing songs together ... orders rapidly went out, all shore-leave cancelled.

... our current conservative blowback will be short lived and progress will continue...
I hope ours as as ephemeral! Our Home Office minister fell on her sword when it was revealed the govt. planned to repatriate Caribbean immigrants who were invited to the UK ('the land of opportunity') in the post-war years to take up the jobs that no-one wanted — the Windrush generation.

She was not in office at the time ... she carried the can for our Prime Minister, Theresa May, the architect of the policy.

... much to the dismay if the dinosaurs
'if' the dinosaurs? :D Too late dude, he last one said to me, "Game over, man! :eek:"

As you know, I'm not a great believer in the inexorable power of 'progress', I often think we just muddle forward and justify events retroactively. But, if 'if the dinosaurs' was not a simple slip-of-the-finger spelling mistake, but a canny reference to those currently in office ... Come they day!

This week we had a bill through Parliament to outlaw 'upskirting' — The Voyeurism (Offences) Bill, expected to breeze through the House, faced SIX HOURS of filibustering by one Conservative MP and then moments before the vote another called 'Objection!' and the bill failed. A disgrace. Especially when said MP has a track-record of blocking legislation.

His excuse was 'lack of sufficient debate' (after six hours of blether?), which on the face of it seems a cautionary device to prevent hurried legislation that results in more harm than good. But how long does it take to determine whether or not looking up women's skirts is a bad thing? What's to debate?

Sir Christopher Chope, yes, he holds a knighthood for 'services to the public', didn't object on the grounds of lack of scrutiny, but rather because he hadn't bothered to take the time to find out what 'upskirting' is. Perish the thought he might hold a vested interest, or believe it's just hysterical women making a great deal of fuss about nothing. He notably pulled the same stunt on bills to allow same-sex marriage, amnesty for men convicted of homosexuality, the minimum wage, the criminalising of revenge evictions and free hospital parking for carers.

And six hours? SIX HOURS? It's not as if there's any suggestion one should green light the 'bleeding obvious' and spend the time on more complex, difficult and dangerous affairs, domestic and global ...

Anyone remember that story I posted about the police dog stabbed by an assailant while defending his handler? An 'offence' which is treated as damage of goods, like breaking a window or knocking off a policeman's hat? The bill to make it a criminal offence to attack animals in public service, like police dogs and horses, rescue animals, etc?

That one was similarly torpedoed at the last moment by an 'objection'.

Some dinos I'll be glad to see the back of.
Petition calls for transgender high school athletes to compete by birth gender

What is the fair thing to do here?

I remember the BS/MS/PhD with the police dog.

I fear that he would've changed his tune if it was one of Queen Elizabeth II's "beloved" corgis...

Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine
a resounding ...YAY! I've lived in many houses, some with has many as four bathrooms, some with only one...never have I had any gender specific bathrooms ... have any of you?
... never have I had any gender specific bathrooms ... have any of you?
One partner, three daughters, one bathroom, and an door open policy.

The policy began when my beloved and I first got together. She from a '.alt art' background, me from a Catholic family with sisters. So when I went to the loo, I'd shut the bathroom door, and lock it.

I can't remember how long we were together before my beloved tried to come into the bathroom while I was in residence, and slammed into a locked door.
Me: "Are you OK?"
She: "The door's locked."
"Why's the door locked?"
"I'm in the loo."
"But why's the door locked?"
"I'm having a poo."
"But why's the door locked?"
So from then on, it was a door open policy.

When my girlies were growing up, she and I decided that when they started shutting the door, that would be the signal for me to shut the door. Our family is happily heterosexual, so cannot comment on the broader issues.
One partner, three daughters, one bathroom, and an door open policy
In rereading this I think you mean unlocked? Not open? I've lived where bathroom doors were taken off... And/or left open while people used them, so someone else could use the other facilities in the room.

In Australia I found they built houses with bathrooms (bath/shower n sink) and toilet rooms as separate.