Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Ideologia liberal, Senza categoria

I liberal alle corde. La torta più costosa del Regno Unito.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2018-10-12.

2018-10-12__Gay Cae 001

«Five Supreme Courts justices travelled to Belfast earlier this year to hear the case.»

*

«On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that there was no political discrimination as well as no discrimination based on Mr Lee’s sexual orientation»

*

«The legal battle – which has lasted four-and-a-half years and has cost nearly £500,000 so far – has raised questions over equality and freedom of conscience.»

* * * * * * *

Questo che segue è il testo del Deutsche Welle.

UK court sides with bakers in Northern Irish gay cake fight

«A Northern Irish bakery that refused to bake a cake iced with a pro-gay slogan won its bid to overturn an earlier prosecution for discrimination after the UK’s Supreme Court.  

The five judges ruled that the business relationship between the prospective buyer, Gareth Lee, and vendor, Ashers Baking, did not involve people being refused jobs or services because of their religious faith, political affliation or sexual orientation.

Wednesday’s ruling reversed an earlier decision made in a Belfast County court that Ashers had discriminated against Lee on the grounds of sexual orientation. It also overturned the 500-pound (€430, $405) damages award imposed on it.

Freedom of expression, as guaranteed by article 10 of the European convention on human rights, includes the right “not to express an opinion which one does not hold,” according to Brenda Hale, president of the Supreme Court. ….

Lee, a gay rights activist, sued the company for discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and political beliefs. He supports the campaign to legalize same-sex marriage in the UK province, the only part of the UK where same-sex marriage is not allowed. ….

The Northern Ireland Equality Commission spent £150,000 (€190,000, $205,000) of public money in backing Lee in the case, while Ashers spent £200,000, covered by The Christian Institute, a charity and lobby group. The cake itself would have cost £36.50.»

*

Ironia della sorte. La Suprema Corte Europea aveva usato la stessa identica frase per sentenziare in modo opposto. Poi taluni parlano di ‘giustizia‘.

*

Quanto riportato è chiaramente illuminante sull’entità del tracollo dell’ideologia liberal.

*

Il problema era stato affrontato un anno fa dalla Suprema Corte americana.

The United States Department of Justice. 2017-10-06. Attorney General Sessions Issues Guidance On Federal Law Protections For Religious Liberty

*

America. Corte Suprema e Masterpiece Cakeshop Case.

«Sei anni or sono Mr Jack Phillips, di professione pasticciere, si era rifiutato di allestire la torta di nozze per un matrimonio omosessuale.

La coppia portò la cosa in giudizio, asserendo un proprio diritto che il pasticciere li servisse.

Il processo si dipanò in tutti i suoi gradi nel Colorando ed alla fine approdò per un giudizio finale e definitivo davanti alla Corte Suprema di Washington.

Il problema giuridico sembrerebbe essere alquanto intricato.

Da una parte c’è la libertà del pasticciere di negare i propri servizi, ed in effetti nessuna legge impone ai pasticcieri di essere obbligati a vendere ciò che fanno.

Non solo, il pasticciere si appella anche alla libertà religiosa, per cui vorrebbe veder tutelato il proprio diritto di credere e praticare la propria religione.

Dall’altra parte i due sposini si sono sentiti discriminati, e discriminati in quanto gay, e ciò sarebbe contrario alle leggi vigenti.»

*

Judge: Baker can refuse to make same-sex wedding cakes

*

America. Crepe tra i liberal per un nuovo caso di Masterpiece Cakeshop.

«A leggere la stampa americana l’unico vero problema che ossessiona ed attanaglia il grande pubblico è quello sessuale. Sessuale sicuramente sì, purché sia contro natura in una del 179 forme canoniche sancite dalla Corte Suprema.»

*

«No baker may place their wares in a public display case, open their shop, and then refuse to sell because of race, religion, gender, or gender identification»

*

«The difference here is that the cake in question is not yet baked»

*

«Judge Lampe said California’s interest in preserving an open, public marketplace cannot compel an individual to endorse or communicate a message by which he or she disagrees, saying a wedding cake is not just a cake when it comes to free speech»

* * *

America. La Suprema Corte fa cessare la persecuzione contro religione e Masterpiece Cakeshop.

« La Suprema Corte degli Stati Uniti di America ha sentenziato sul caso Masterpiece Cakeshop versus Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

 «In Masterpiece Cakeshop case, Supreme Court holds that Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated baker’s rights under the free exercise»»

* * * * * * *

La California, così come la famosa United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, è liberal della più specchiata dottrina. Costituisce il centro nevralgico della ‘resistenza‘ alla Presidenza Trump ed a quanto essa esprime.

A conti fatti, l’allucinante vicenda del Masterpiece Cakeshop e quella dell’omologo caso californiano hanno paralizzato il funzionamento di una Corte di Appello federale e della Suprema Corte degli Stati Uniti per oltre un anno, con un danno al Cittadino Contribuente di oltre trecento milioni di dollari.

L’ideologia liberal assume come dogmi di fede il relativismo etico, la necessità del controllo della nascite e dell’aborto per quanti incautamente sopravvissuti agli anticoncezionali, la propalazione dei ogni possibile tipo di perversione sessuale. Nulla sarà mai sufficientemente pervertito per i liberal.

Appena giungono al potere, impongono per legge il loro credo ideologico, trovando poi in corti di giustizia compiacenti un feroce braccio esecutivo, vero e proprio gruppo di fuoco persecutorio.

*

L’avvento di Mr Trump alla presidenza degli Stati Uniti e le nomine delle Loro Giustizie Mr Gorsuch e Mr Kavanaugh alla Corte Suprema hanno però ribaltato l’era liberal, negli Stati Uniti e nel mondo.

Questo è quanto accaduto nel Regno Unito: cosa prima impensata ed impensabile.

Ashers ‘gay cake’ row: Bakers win Supreme Court appeal

« The Christian owners of a Northern Ireland bakery have won their appeal in the so-called “gay cake” discrimination case.

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

The five justices on the Supreme Court were unanimous in their judgement.

The high-profile dispute began in 2014 when the bakery refused to make a cake with the slogan “Support Gay Marriage”.

The customer, gay rights activist Gareth Lee, sued the company for discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and political beliefs.

Ashers lost the case and the subsequent appeal, but on Wednesday the firm won its appeal at the Supreme Court.

In quotes: Reaction to judgement

‘Gay cake’ row Q&A

Timeline: Bakery discrimination case

The legal battle – which has lasted four-and-a-half years and has cost nearly £500,000 so far – has raised questions over equality and freedom of conscience.

Ashers bakery’s general manager Daniel McArthur said he was delighted and relieved by the ruling.

“I know a lot of people will be glad to hear this ruling today, because this ruling protects freedom of speech and freedom of conscience for everyone,” Mr McArthur said outside the court.

 Gareth Lee, the gay rights activist who took the case against Ashers, said the ruling made him feel like a second class citizen.

“To me, this was never about conscience or a statement. All I wanted to do was to order a cake in a shop,” he said.

He said he was now concerned about “the implications for all of the gay community”.

The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland, which has supported Gareth Lee’s action against Ashers, said it would study the implications of the judgement carefully.

“There is a concern that this judgement may raise uncertainty about the application of equality law in the commercial sphere, both about what businesses can do and what customers may expect,” said Dr Michael Wardlow, the organisation’s chief commissioner.

What is the row about?

The customer, Gareth Lee, requested a cake featuring the Sesame Street characters Bert and Ernie, iced with the message: “Support Gay Marriage.”

His order was initially accepted at a branch of Ashers in Belfast city centre, but two days later the baking firm’s head office contacted Mr Lee to say the firm would not make the cake.

Why did the bakers refuse?

The family-run baking company, based in County Antrim, has described the same-sex marriage slogan as “inconsistent” with their religious beliefs.

But it points out that the company’s issue was with the slogan and not Mr Lee, claiming it would have refused the same order from a heterosexual client.

As he arrived outside the Supreme Court for the start of the case 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.”

What has the court said and why?

The president of the Supreme Court, Lady Hale ruled that the bakers did not refuse to fulfil his 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.”

What does this mean for the law?

When Mr Lee first took action against the firm, he said the bakery’s actions left him feeling like a lesser person.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that there was no political discrimination as well as no discrimination based on Mr Lee’s sexual orientation.

“This conclusion is not in any way to diminish the need to protect gay people and people who support gay marriage from discrimination,” said Lady Hale.

“It is deeply humiliating, and an affront to human dignity, to deny someone a service because of that person’s race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, religion or belief.

“But that is not what happened in this case.”

Five Supreme Courts justices travelled to Belfast earlier this year to hear the case.»

Annunci