Peter Tatchell supports bakers who refused to make ‘gay’ cake

Illustrated rainbow pride flag on a white background.

Veteran gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell has ā€œchanged his mindā€ about a bakery that faced legal action for refusing to bake a ā€˜gayā€™ cake.

The owners of Ashers Bakery in Belfast were found guilty of unlawful discrimination based on sexual orientation and political or religious grounds, after the company in Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland refused to bake a cake showing the message ā€˜Support Gay Marriageā€™ above an image of Sesame Streetā€™s Bert and Ernie.

Despite losing its initial case, the bakery owners are pursuing a legal appeal of the ruling ā€“ with financial and legal help from the Christian Institute.
cake
The Christian Institute opposed the Equality Act and remains fundamentally opposed to anti-discrimination protections for LGBT people ā€“ but their case has found an unlikely ally in gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell.

In an article for the Guardian, Mr Tatchell claimed he was not convinced the incident was a legitimate use of anti-discrimination laws, because the issue was to do with the message on the cake and not the customerā€™s sexuality.

He wrote: ā€œI profoundly disagree with Ashersā€™ opposition to same-sex love and marriage, and support protests against themā€¦ [but] on reflection the court was wrong to penalise Ashers and I was wrong to endorse its decision.ā€

The rights campaigner explained: ā€œThe court erred by ruling that [gay customer Gareth Lee] was discriminated against because of his sexual orientation and political opinions.

ā€œHis cake request was refused not because he was gay, but because of the message he asked for.

ā€œThere is no evidence that his sexuality was the reason Ashers declined his order. Despite this, Judge Isobel Brownlie said that refusing the pro-gay marriage slogan was unlawful indirect sexual orientation discrimination.

ā€œOn the question of political discrimination, the judge said Ashers had denied Lee service based on his request for a message supporting same-sex marriage.

ā€œShe noted: ā€˜If the plaintiff had ordered a cake with the words ā€˜support marriageā€™ or ā€˜support heterosexual marriageā€™ I have no doubt that such a cake would have been providedā€™.

ā€œBrownlie thus concluded that by refusing to provide a cake with a pro-gay marriage wording Ashers had treated him less favourably, contrary to the law.ā€

Mr Tatchell claimed the ruling set a ā€œworrying precedentā€ by suggesting that ā€œservice providers are required to facilitate any ā€˜lawfulā€™ message, even if they have a conscientious objection.ā€

In addition to opposing discrimination protections, The Christian Institute previously fought to oppose an equal age of consent for gay people, civil partnerships and same-sex marriage ā€“ while it sought to keep Section 28, a law banning the ā€˜promotionā€™ of sexuality in schools.