Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Debs. on 18 January 2011, 16:28:08
-
....at last some common sense!
The court has decided that if your hotel is "open" for guests; it should mean just that!
Hardly rocket science, if the 'offence' had been caused by being dark-skinnned, a midget, a Buddhist or whatever the heck else: there would`ve been uproar.
Fact......there are gay men and gay women; it doesn`t demean or change your personal religious beliefs or threaten your sexuality; they`re not 'doing it' to annoy or hurt you...they are just living their lives and trying to be happy: `get over it! >:(
[/rant]
-
....at last some common sense!
The court has decided that if your hotel is "open" for guests; it should mean just that!
Hardly rocket science, if the 'offence' had been caused by being dark-skinnned, a midget, a Buddhist or whatever the heck else: there would`ve been uproar.
Fact......there are gay men and gay women; it doesn`t demean or change your personal religious beliefs or threaten your sexuality; they`re not 'doing it' to annoy or hurt you...they are just living their lives and trying to be happy: `get over it! >:(
[/rant]
+1 :y
-
What about guests smelling of wool and urine? :-/ ;D
-
What about guests smelling of wool and urine? :-/ ;D
;D ;D :y
-
What about guests smelling of wool and urine? :-/ ;D
I`ve had my fuller them! ;D
-
A few things of note.
They should not have accepted the booking in the first place if they didn't want them.
Was there anything on booking to warn the visitors what the rules were?
Should small establishment owners be able to pick & choose? Lots of establishments have no single sex groups (to deter stag / hen groups).
As far as I am concerned both sides do have rights, both the gay couple and the religious B&B owners.
-
A few things of note.
They should not have accepted the booking in the first place if they didn't want them.
Was there anything on booking to warn the visitors what the rules were?
Should small establishment owners be able to pick & choose? Lots of establishments have no single sex groups (to deter stag / hen groups).
As far as I am concerned both sides do have rights, both the gay couple and the religious B&B owners.
Quite right Martin.
-
A few things of note.
They should not have accepted the booking in the first place if they didn't want them.
Was there anything on booking to warn the visitors what the rules were?
Should small establishment owners be able to pick & choose? Lots of establishments have no single sex groups (to deter stag / hen groups).
As far as I am concerned both sides do have rights, both the gay couple and the religious B&B owners.
Such proscriptive "conditions" (if any were to be applied) should have been clearly announced BEFORE any booking was accepted.....The reason they weren`t (it would seem to me) is because the hoteliers knew that any such proscription would be against British and European law....but they chose to open for "public" business whilst applying 'occult' judgements on guests: a welcome, but only if you fit their view of acceptability.
It seems, that they now know the meaning of: "Judge not, lest you be judged yourself" ;)
-
A good decision Debs, and as you say pure common sense :y :y
-
I have to disagree. I have kept a bit of an eye on this case through the web/papers/TV etc.
My opinion is that it was a set up organised by the "Peter Tatchell wing" of the gay community. I also believe that the Christain couple should have the right to decide that they dont have gay couples in their B&B. It is not the same as barring people for being Irish/black/brown etc. etc. There is no possible reason to have moral or religious objection to people due to their skin colour or country of origin. It is possible to have moral or religious objection to homosexuality.
I believe that the left have held a sustained campaign against Christianity in this country for a long time, and this is part of it.
Its an easy target really - Gays are now widely accepted in society at large, but "old fashioned Christians" dont accept it so it makes it quite easy to hammer them.
To me, it seems that tolerance and diversity is a one way street.
I am still waiting for the day when these people decide to launch their attack on the muslim religion. I am somewhat bemused by the fact that they didnt start there.After all, at least some Muslim preacher teach that Homosexuals should be put to death by stoning or being thrown off a cliff. But maybe their agenda is more about attacking Christianity than it is about defending Gay rights.Or maybe Muslims fit into the left wing description of a threatened minority, and are therefore exempt from criticism ?
The fact is that there always have been and always will be people who are attracted to their own sex. But I believe it is an alternative lifestyle, no more no less. It is not imo as valid and relevant in society as the hetrosexual relationship, on which civilisation has been founded since the dawn of time.
Homophobic ? - no, Im not frightened of homosexuality, but I do find the "militant tendency" which has come to the fore in recent years, both scary and sinister.
P.S. If you google "gay only hotels" you will find a long list of them in this country. I dont see anyone bringing prosecutions against them. I rest my case. ;)
http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=ie7&q=gay+only+hotels+uk&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rlz=1I7ACAW_enGB404GB404&redir_esc=&ei=VdQ1TdrfGoqKhQfXj4j_Cw
-
A few things of note.
They should not have accepted the booking in the first place if they didn't want them.
Was there anything on booking to warn the visitors what the rules were?
Should small establishment owners be able to pick & choose? Lots of establishments have no single sex groups (to deter stag / hen groups).
As far as I am concerned both sides do have rights, both the gay couple and the religious B&B owners.
Such proscriptive "conditions" (if any were to be applied) should have been clearly announced BEFORE any booking was accepted.....The reason they weren`t (it would seem to me) is because the hoteliers knew that any such proscription would be against British and European law....but they chose to open for "public" business whilst applying 'occult' judgements on guests: a welcome, but only if you fit their view of acceptability.
It seems, that they now know the meaning of: "Judge not, lest you be judged yourself" ;)
Maybe. But I have read that these particular homosexuals had prior knowledge of the B&B and the booking was made to 'entrap' the owners. I can't say that that is definately the case but, in this world, I would not be surprised.
-
If you google "gay only hotels" you will find a long list of them in this country.
The whole point is that this hotel was not advertised as "No-Gays"/"Anti-Gay"....if they had the courage of their convictions (and it were legal to do so) then this case might easily have been 'rested'. ;)
They chose to exercise judgement and act in a way contrary to law; that they are 'of faith' is secondary to that fact.
e.g: It`s against my religious beliefs to pay taxes; but does that excuse me from liability? ::)
-
I have to disagree. I have kept a bit of an eye on this case through the web/papers/TV etc.
My opinion is that it was a set up organised by the "Peter Tatchell wing" of the gay community. I also believe that the Christain couple should have the right to decide that they dont have gay couples in their B&B. It is not the same as barring people for being Irish/black/brown etc. etc. There is no possible reason to have moral or religious objection to people due to their skin colour or country of origin. It is possible to have moral or religious objection to homosexuality.
I believe that the left have held a sustained campaign against Christianity in this country for a long time, and this is part of it.
Its an easy target really - Gays are now widely accepted in society at large, but "old fashioned Christians" dont accept it so it makes it quite easy to hammer them.
To me, it seems that tolerance and diversity is a one way street.
I am still waiting for the day when these people decide to launch their attack on the muslim religion. I am somewhat bemused by the fact that they didnt start there.After all, at least some Muslim preacher teach that Homosexuals should be put to death by stoning or being thrown off a cliff. But maybe their agenda is more about attacking Christianity than it is about defending Gay rights.Or maybe Muslims fit into the left wing description of a threatened minority, and are therefore exempt from criticism ?
The fact is that there always have been and always will be people who are attracted to their own sex. But I believe it is an alternative lifestyle, no more no less. It is not imo as valid and relevant in society as the hetrosexual relationship, on which civilisation has been founded since the dawn of time.
Homophobic ? - no, Im not frightened of homosexuality, but I do find the "militant tendency" which has come to the fore in recent years, both scary and sinister.
P.S. If you google "gay only hotels" you will find a long list of them in this country. I dont see anyone bringing prosecutions against them. I rest my case. ;)
http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=ie7&q=gay+only+hotels+uk&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rlz=1I7ACAW_enGB404GB404&redir_esc=&ei=VdQ1TdrfGoqKhQfXj4j_Cw
I agree ALBS, I also think it was a deliberate set-up, and perhaps a bit of 'live and let live' would not go amiss in these sort of circumstances. The problem in this country nowadays is that 'most' people's beliefs and personal preferences are further and further constrained by ever increasing legislation. :(
-
If you google "gay only hotels" you will find a long list of them in this country.
The whole point is that this hotel was not advertised as "No-Gays"/"Anti-Gay"....if they had the courage of their convictions (and it were legal to do so) then this case might easily have been 'rested'. ;)
They chose to exercise judgement and act in a way contrary to law; that they are 'of faith' is secondary to that fact.
e.g: It`s against my religious beliefs to pay taxes; but does that excuse me from liability? ::)
If they had advertised as "A hotel for hetrosexuals" Im very sure they would have ended up in the same situation they are in now, yet all these hotels openly advertise themselves as " gay hotels" without fear of prosecution because they know full well that the " new establishment are on side with them.
The couple were prosecuted under the equality act - things dont seem very equal to me.
"Of faith" being secondary to the law of the land, very much depends which faith you are "of" - demonstrated by the fact that Muslims can preach "death to homosexuals" without fear of prosecution.
As for taxation being against (Christian) religious beliefs. I seem to remember the good lord saying on that subject "render onto Caesar that which is Caesar,s". ;)
-
It looks to me as though the defense was that the B&B owners do not wish to let out double rooms to unmarried couples. Same sex was not the issue though the prosecution wished to make it that way.
A difficult one to enforce IMHO as the "Mr & Mrs Smith" syndrome has been going on for decades. Granted "Mr & Mr Smith" is a bit of a giveaway!
I have certainly shared a hotel room with another bloke before now with no untoward connotations.
-
It looks to me as though the defense was that the B&B owners do not wish to let out double rooms to unmarried couples. Same sex was not the issue though the prosecution wished to make it that way.
A difficult one to enforce IMHO as the "Mr & Mrs Smith" syndrome has been going on for decades. Granted "Mr & Mr Smith" is a bit of a giveaway!
I have certainly shared a hotel room with another bloke before now with no untoward connotations.
Too much information ::)
-
I remember when this first happened & forgot about it til i heard the outcome today. It's a tough one to call in many ways. I know the world has moved on from dark ages prejudices regarding racism, sexuality, religion etc & mainly for the better. I'm very liberal regarding racism. S.P 32 is as black as your hat but you could'nt meet a better natured bloke. He's always smiling & i consider him a mate. I have no interest in religion other than i think it's all a bit silly & is to blame for the odd spat between countries but i know many folk take comfort from thier beliefs & should be entitled to do so. (fanatics are another issue entirely).
These folk are Christians. Does'nt the bible frown on homo sexuality? Man shall not lay down with man or something?
If you ride a motorbike onto a garage forecourt/supermarket there are signs telling you to remove all headgear to prevent hold ups etc. If you are of a certain religion you are exempt from wearing the crash helmet in the first place or you can cover your face with the burka? veil thing. So religion stands up in these cases but not in the case in question,. If this couple don't want this sort of thing going on under thier roof they should have the right to say so regardless of the business they run. I would'nt. Sorry but i just would'nt.
I believe some hotels have rooms for smokers despite the pub ban. Would'nt the world be a better place if folk could decide for themselves. You can smoke in this pub/restaurant but not in this one. Gay men can share a room in this hotel but not that one?
If the hoteliers/publicans were left to decide who could/could'nt smoke/sleep together i reckon we would have a healthy balance of establishnents to suit all tastes.
There are so many laws here they just don't add up.
-
Quite agree Guy.There is a law for everything, it just depends which ones they choose to enforce. There are strict laws against religious descrimination, but it could be argued (strongly imo) that the B&B owners have been discriminated against (by the authorities) on religious grounds. :y
For the record. I have no religious beliefs whatsoever.
-
It looks to me as though the defense was that the B&B owners do not wish to let out double rooms to unmarried couples. Same sex was not the issue though the prosecution wished to make it that way.
A difficult one to enforce IMHO as the "Mr & Mrs Smith" syndrome has been going on for decades. Granted "Mr & Mr Smith" is a bit of a giveaway!
I have certainly shared a hotel room with another bloke before now with no untoward connotations.
;) Having shared the mini-bar; let no man put asunder! ;D
:P....... :-*
-
There are so many points raised above to answer! But here's one to start.
AFAIK sexual orientation is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act, regardless of whether orientation is same sex, opposite sex, or both. A business refusing service to straight people is committing the same offence as one refusing service to gay or bi customers. I guess there have been no test cases 'cos it isn't so much of a problem.
K
-
I know the world has moved on from dark ages prejudices regarding racism,
Maybe not so far as you might have thought ... eg see "Ford Galaxy" thread on this forum.
K
-
Quite agree Guy.There is a law for everything, it just depends which ones they choose to enforce. There are strict laws against religious descrimination, but it could be argued (strongly imo) that the B&B owners have been discriminated against (by the authorities) on religious grounds. :y
For the record. I have no religious beliefs whatsoever.
Is it not the case that they were prosecuted for refusing service, not for their religion? They raised religion in their defence, yes?
K
-
Straight people dont tend to have a desire to go to gay hotels in order to get themselves thrown out and then make a huge case out of it.
Perhaps most of us accept that gays like to congregate at such places to enjoy themselves, and dont have any problem with that. Live and let live - but it should be a 2 way street. ;)
-
Quite agree Guy.There is a law for everything, it just depends which ones they choose to enforce. There are strict laws against religious descrimination, but it could be argued (strongly imo) that the B&B owners have been discriminated against (by the authorities) on religious grounds. :y
For the record. I have no religious beliefs whatsoever.
Is it not the case that they were prosecuted for refusing service, not for their religion? They raised religion in their defence, yes?
K
They refused service because it was contrary to their religious beliefs, which brought them into conflict with the equalities act - afaik.
-
It looks to me as though the defense was that the B&B owners do not wish to let out double rooms to unmarried couples. Same sex was not the issue though the prosecution wished to make it that way.
A difficult one to enforce IMHO as the "Mr & Mrs Smith" syndrome has been going on for decades. Granted "Mr & Mr Smith" is a bit of a giveaway!
I have certainly shared a hotel room with another bloke before now with no untoward connotations.
;) Having shared the mini-bar; let no man put asunder! ;D
:P....... :-*
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7uGd-FJuaQ[/media]
-
Straight people dont tend to have a desire to go to gay hotels in order to get themselves thrown out and then make a huge case out of it.
Perhaps most of us accept that gays like to congregate at such places to enjoy themselves, and dont have any problem with that. Live and let live - but it should be a 2 way street. ;)
I fear you may be accused of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation here. A person's willingness to stand up for their rights is not a function of their sexual orientation.
-
If you google "gay only hotels" you will find a long list of them in this country.
The whole point is that this hotel was not advertised as "No-Gays"/"Anti-Gay"....if they had the courage of their convictions (and it were legal to do so) then this case might easily have been 'rested'. ;)
They chose to exercise judgement and act in a way contrary to law; that they are 'of faith' is secondary to that fact.
e.g: It`s against my religious beliefs to pay taxes; but does that excuse me from liability? ::)
I dunno. Shirtlifters...you either love 'em or hate 'em ;D
as long as I dont have to join em.
-
Straight people dont tend to have a desire to go to gay hotels in order to get themselves thrown out and then make a huge case out of it.
Perhaps most of us accept that gays like to congregate at such places to enjoy themselves, and dont have any problem with that. Live and let live - but it should be a 2 way street. ;)
I fear you may be accused of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation here. A person's willingness to stand up for their rights is not a function of their sexual orientation.
My point was - there is a very militant faction within the gay community, which looks for this kind of attitude, and thrive on causing as much trouble as possible for those involved when they do find it. There is no(longer) such a faction that I am aware of within the hetrosexual community.
As I said - tolerance should be a two way street.
I would be interested to hear your views on the apparent contradiction of some people in the Muslim community preaching that homosexuals should be put to death, and afaik there have never been any consquences for this purveyance of hatred. I find it beyond strange tbh. :-/
-
My point was - there is a very militant faction within the gay community, which looks for this kind of attitude, and thrive on causing as much trouble as possible for those involved when they do find it. There is no(longer) such a faction that I am aware of within the hetrosexual community.
As I said - tolerance should be a two way street.
Maybe there's an opportunity here for some OOF members!
I don't know why people go on about home essentials anyway - we all need curtains http://www.homeessentials.co.uk/shop/? :)
Got to go do some work now. K
-
Thats a ludicrous thing to say. >:(That sentence was alluding to the fact that it wasnt uncommon 30 years ago to encounter what was reffered to "queer bashing" and the fact that the world (or this part of it) has moved on a long way since then........methinks we are trying to engage in an interesting exchange of views and opinions with a closed and brainwashed mind. ::)
For all you know I may be Gay. I am standing up for what I believe to be the rights of a couple who happen to be Christian, although Im not a Christian. Its nothing to do with my own personal religious beliefs, or orientation. Im simply saying it because I believe it to be right.
Maybe you dont believe I should have the right to do that ?
The veiled threat ?...of "I fear you may be........." would possibly suggest so. ;)
I would also be interested in your opinion on the fact that there are many hotels which specifically cater for Gays. Is their existence not discriminatory against hetrosexuals ?
-
IMO, yet another miscarraige of justice... Sure if they have a policy of non married couples sharing a double bed, then they should be able to uphold that policy. I really beleive that they have made the law fit the case...
-
Thats a ludicrous thing to say. >:(.......methinks we are trying to engage in an interesting exchange of views and opinions with a closed and brainwashed mind. ::)
For all you know I may be Gay. I am standing up for what I believe to be the rights of a couple who happen to be Christian, although Im not a Christian. Its nothing to do with my own personal religious beliefs, or orientation. Im simply saying it because I believe it to be right.
Maybe you dont believe I should have the right to do that ?
The veiled threat ?...of "I fear you may be........." would possibly suggest so. ;)
Scratch his eyes out Albs. :y
-
What this discussion needs is some balance. Banjax, Opti.....yer barred! ;D
-
What this discussion needs is some balance. Banjax, Opti.....yer barred! ;D
;D ;D ;D
-
Whoever deleted my 'shirtlifters' post, forgot remove the quote later on. Jump to it.
-
I don't like blokes doing that stuff to eachother but that's only an opinion right or wrong. If that's what they want to do i accept the should be able to. I'm not suggesting they should be outlawed or persecuted in any way. By the same count the B&B owners should be able to decide who they want or don't want on thier premises for whatever reason. I've already mentioned the crash helmet/religeious dress issue, & can't a publican still refuse to serve some one without giving a reason? There is plenty of room for gays, smokers & religions without the law getting there oar in and stirring things up. Once again let folk decide for themselves & everyone would be catered for.
Methinks the law has chased it's own tail so fast it's bitten it's own arse because none of this ties up. Shame on the judge. Guy.
-
I remember when this first happened & forgot about it til i heard the outcome today. It's a tough one to call in many ways. I know the world has moved on from dark ages prejudices regarding racism, sexuality, religion etc & mainly for the better. I'm very liberal regarding racism. S.P 32 is as black as your hat but you could'nt meet a better natured bloke. He's always smiling & i consider him a mate. I have no interest in religion other than i think it's all a bit silly & is to blame for the odd spat between countries but i know many folk take comfort from thier beliefs & should be entitled to do so. (fanatics are another issue entirely).
These folk are Christians. Does'nt the bible frown on homo sexuality? Man shall not lay down with man or something?
If you ride a motorbike onto a garage forecourt/supermarket there are signs telling you to remove all headgear to prevent hold ups etc. If you are of a certain religion you are exempt from wearing the crash helmet in the first place or you can cover your face with the burka? veil thing. So religion stands up in these cases but not in the case in question,. If this couple don't want this sort of thing going on under thier roof they should have the right to say so regardless of the business they run. I would'nt. Sorry but i just would'nt.
I believe some hotels have rooms for smokers despite the pub ban. Would'nt the world be a better place if folk could decide for themselves. You can smoke in this pub/restaurant but not in this one. Gay men can share a room in this hotel but not that one?
If the hoteliers/publicans were left to decide who could/could'nt smoke/sleep together i reckon we would have a healthy balance of establishnents to suit all tastes.
There are so many laws here they just don't add up.
Here Here!!
-
I don't know if "Bent Valve" is looking like such a good choice of moniker, having read what you think. ;)
-
Presumably, and I'm no expert mind, that the charming "devout christian" couple take no money on a Sunday?
Thought not.
Funny how religion is used to excuse the least tolerant of behaviour in society :o
-
Presumably, and I'm no expert mind, that the charming "devout christian" couple take no money on a Sunday?
Thought not.
Funny how religion is used to excuse the least tolerant of behaviour in society :o
Ah. A balanced view at last.
-
Presumably, and I'm no expert mind, that the charming "devout christian" couple take no money on a Sunday?
Thought not.
Funny how religion is used to excuse the least tolerant of behaviour in society :o
Ah. A balanced view at last.
thanks :y
what bit did i get wrong? ::)
-
Thats a ludicrous thing to say. >:(That sentence was alluding to the fact that it wasnt uncommon 30 years ago to encounter what was reffered to "queer bashing" and the fact that the world (or this part of it) has moved on a long way since then........methinks we are trying to engage in an interesting exchange of views and opinions with a closed and brainwashed mind. ::)
For all you know I may be Gay. I am standing up for what I believe to be the rights of a couple who happen to be Christian, although Im not a Christian. Its nothing to do with my own personal religious beliefs, or orientation. Im simply saying it because I believe it to be right.
Maybe you dont believe I should have the right to do that ?
The veiled threat ?...of "I fear you may be........." would possibly suggest so. ;)
I would also be interested in your opinion on the fact that there are many hotels which specifically cater for Gays. Is their existence not discriminatory against hetrosexuals ?
Have you told your girlfriend?
-
Presumably, and I'm no expert mind, that the charming "devout christian" couple take no money on a Sunday?
Thought not.
Funny how religion is used to excuse the least tolerant of behaviour in society :o
Ah. A balanced view at last.
thanks :y
what bit did i get wrong? ::)
You didn't get anything right wrong. You never get anything right wrong. You are always wrong right :y
-
Presumably, and I'm no expert mind, that the charming "devout christian" couple take no money on a Sunday?
Thought not.
Funny how religion is used to excuse the least tolerant of behaviour in society :o
Ah. A balanced view at last.
thanks :y
what bit did i get wrong? ::)
You didn't get anything right wrong. You never get anything right wrong. You are always wrong right :y
just checking :y
-
What this discussion needs is some balance. Banjax, Opti.....yer barred! ;D
I was just about to offer my impartial objective opinion too........ ;)
-
Presumably, and I'm no expert mind, that the charming "devout christian" couple take no money on a Sunday?
Thought not.
Funny how religion is used to excuse the least tolerant of behaviour in society :o
I was thinking the same thing BJ! ;)
-
I think the fact that so many of us have strong opinions on this shows how highly strung our society has become. I personally feel that we should allow more freedom of expression without persecution, instead of this 'political correctness' in everything. :y
-
8-) Thanks for the interesting perspectives on this story, guys :y
::)....but what this thread really needs, is a laboured principle, a tantrum and the announcement of an intended huff departure! ;D
-
I think the fact that so many of us have strong opinions on this shows how highly strung our society has become. I personally feel that we should allow more freedom of expression without persecution, instead of this 'political correctness' in everything. :y
I think more people should be strung highly. :y
-
IMO, yet another miscarraige of justice... Sure if they have a policy of non married couples sharing a double bed, then they should be able to uphold that policy. I really beleive that they have made the law fit the case...
Heres a thought i had today, when i heard of this policy......
Do they ask to see proof of all male/female guests asking to book a double room that they are married??
If the gay couple had of been married....would they have been welcome to stay??
Probably, the answer would have been no to both questions....so imo pathetic excuse to use....
If they had said gay couples not welcome, then personally i wouldnt have thought about the case tbh
-
IMO, yet another miscarraige of justice... Sure if they have a policy of non married couples sharing a double bed, then they should be able to uphold that policy. I really beleive that they have made the law fit the case...
Heres a thought i had today, when i heard of this policy......
Do they ask to see proof of all male/female guests asking to book a double room that they are married??
If the gay couple had of been married....would they have been welcome to stay??
Probably, the answer would have been no to both questions....so imo pathetic excuse to use....
If they had said gay couples not welcome, then personally i wouldnt have thought about the case tbh
I think they'd had a civil partnership thingy which makes them married in the eyes of the law (who have messed up already on this one) It still should make no difference. I don't recognize or accept such nonsense.
Men getting married my arse...umm, oh dear, what did i just say? :-? :-[ :(
-
What this discussion needs is some balance. Banjax, Opti.....yer barred! ;D
I was just about to offer my impartial objective opinion too........ ;)
You're too late. Banjax has already stated your opinion.
-
I don't know if "Bent Valve" is looking like such a good choice of moniker, having read what you think. ;)
You wouldn't be suggesting that gay people are in any way 'bent' would you ::)
-
8-) Thanks for the interesting perspectives on this story, guys :y
::)....but what this thread really needs, is a laboured principle, a tantrum and the announcement of an intended huff departure! ;D
;D ;D ;D Outstanding. ;D 8-) :y
-
I am not a church person...my visits are restricted to 'hatched matched and despatched'.....however, we all have feelings about certain things....
So, because when it comes on TV, for instance, I find that watching two men kissing totally repulsive and turn the telly over, according to some on here, that makes me a bigoted anti-gay >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
I have got no quarrel with gays etc. If thats their want so be it. And before someone jumps on the bandwagon....the same applies to females :y
But as usual in this country, my feelings don't count ;)
-
8-) Thanks for the interesting perspectives on this story, guys :y
::)....but what this thread really needs, is a laboured principle, a tantrum and the announcement of an intended huff departure! ;D
Some one elses turn today Debs! :D
-
But as usual in this country, my feelings don't count ;)
;) Oh yes they do! :y
:P Anyway, I`m sure that gay men wouldn`t wish to be seen to be ramming it down your throat! ;D
-
Thats a ludicrous thing to say. >:(That sentence was alluding to the fact that it wasnt uncommon 30 years ago to encounter what was reffered to "queer bashing" and the fact that the world (or this part of it) has moved on a long way since then........methinks we are trying to engage in an interesting exchange of views and opinions with a closed and brainwashed mind. ::)
For all you know I may be Gay. I am standing up for what I believe to be the rights of a couple who happen to be Christian, although Im not a Christian. Its nothing to do with my own personal religious beliefs, or orientation. Im simply saying it because I believe it to be right.
Maybe you dont believe I should have the right to do that ?
The veiled threat ?...of "I fear you may be........." would possibly suggest so. ;)
I would also be interested in your opinion on the fact that there are many hotels which specifically cater for Gays. Is their existence not discriminatory against hetrosexuals ?
Albs - don't want to leave this on a bad note so let me try to answer your points.
Thanks for the clarification of your meaning on militants etc. I don't equate queer bashing with the actions of these two blokes (& whichever organisation may have supported them). So I was not suggesting a return to QBing. Instead, I was saying that there is an opportunity for OOF members (who feel strongly about it) to bring a case against any gay hotels that discriminate against straight guests. See my post somewhere above (about 7.05) about the Equality Act.
Of course you have the right to your views - it was never my intention to suggest otherwise, and I'd be interested to understand what I may have written that created that impression.
"I fear you may be ..." - OK, fair point, on reflection this is weaselly - not intended to be a veiled threat. Substitute the more assertive "I think you are being discriminatory on grounds of sexual orientation here. A person's willingness to stand up for their rights is not a function of their sexual orientation."
K
EDIT - your fourth point - for the avoidance of doubt, IMO gay hotels which discriminate against heterosexuals are in the wrong - they have to keep up and provide the same service to all. But there's an important difference here between "discriminating against" and "catering for". If they want to "cater for", let them go ahead and do it. Just like Christian hotels, etc etc - if it's just a difference of taste and style, that's what diversity is all about. Provided it does not treat anyone unfairly.
-
Sorry guys, seems I missed out on all the fun, I was
doing my nails playing rugby ::) ::) ::)
-
Oh Guffer... I've just gotta post this again. Work is'nt easy!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvvMdCTA_os :-*
-
interesting to note(according to the ten o clock news)that the guest house makes it "crystal"on their website that only "married" couples are welcome in their guesthouse,and they clarify what constitutes a marriage in their eyes.sting op...i think so :y
-
sounds like the couple are part of the SS
(serial suer)
-
Oh Guffer... I've just gotta post this again. Work is'nt easy!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvvMdCTA_os :-*
You know, I may just make that the first song that comes on when I switch the car on every morning ;D
-
I have to disagree. I have kept a bit of an eye on this case through the web/papers/TV etc.
My opinion is that it was a set up organised by the "Peter Tatchell wing" of the gay community. I also believe that the Christain couple should have the right to decide that they dont have gay couples in their B&B. It is not the same as barring people for being Irish/black/brown etc. etc. There is no possible reason to have moral or religious objection to people due to their skin colour or country of origin. It is possible to have moral or religious objection to homosexuality.
I believe that the left have held a sustained campaign against Christianity in this country for a long time, and this is part of it.
Its an easy target really - Gays are now widely accepted in society at large, but "old fashioned Christians" dont accept it so it makes it quite easy to hammer them.
To me, it seems that tolerance and diversity is a one way street.
I am still waiting for the day when these people decide to launch their attack on the muslim religion. I am somewhat bemused by the fact that they didnt start there.After all, at least some Muslim preacher teach that Homosexuals should be put to death by stoning or being thrown off a cliff. But maybe their agenda is more about attacking Christianity than it is about defending Gay rights.Or maybe Muslims fit into the left wing description of a threatened minority, and are therefore exempt from criticism ?
The fact is that there always have been and always will be people who are attracted to their own sex. But I believe it is an alternative lifestyle, no more no less. It is not imo as valid and relevant in society as the hetrosexual relationship, on which civilisation has been founded since the dawn of time.
Homophobic ? - no, Im not frightened of homosexuality, but I do find the "militant tendency" which has come to the fore in recent years, both scary and sinister.
P.S. If you google "gay only hotels" you will find a long list of them in this country. I dont see anyone bringing prosecutions against them. I rest my case. ;)
http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=ie7&q=gay+only+hotels+uk&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rlz=1I7ACAW_enGB404GB404&redir_esc=&ei=VdQ1TdrfGoqKhQfXj4j_Cw
Succinctly put & well reasoned argument Albs :y
-
since i have left school i have been turned down for holidays, no male groups, turned away for digs, no builders. refused entry in clubs, wrong dress code. pubs, dont like the look of you. so rather what. who cares. same old story, weak and insensitive looking for attention yet again. everyone has the right to refuse entry to there premises no matter what religion or colour or sexuality. i wouldnt let a couple of 2 bob faggotts in my house, especially the ones who are open and think its ok to openly show how in love they are.sickens me. if its ok for other groups to discriminate on the grounds you dont fit into there society then its good enough for me to refuse them entry to my premises. gay clubs, womens clubs, religious houses. black police officers assocoiation,and many more, all one sided.i am now rascist,homophobic and i am against a multicultural society, yes. i have every right to be. because thats how they are. they wont intergrate the same as i wont.
-
Thats a ludicrous thing to say. >:(That sentence was alluding to the fact that it wasnt uncommon 30 years ago to encounter what was reffered to "queer bashing" and the fact that the world (or this part of it) has moved on a long way since then........methinks we are trying to engage in an interesting exchange of views and opinions with a closed and brainwashed mind. ::)
For all you know I may be Gay. I am standing up for what I believe to be the rights of a couple who happen to be Christian, although Im not a Christian. Its nothing to do with my own personal religious beliefs, or orientation. Im simply saying it because I believe it to be right.
Maybe you dont believe I should have the right to do that ?
The veiled threat ?...of "I fear you may be........." would possibly suggest so. ;)
I would also be interested in your opinion on the fact that there are many hotels which specifically cater for Gays. Is their existence not discriminatory against hetrosexuals ?
Albs - don't want to leave this on a bad note so let me try to answer your points.
Thanks for the clarification of your meaning on militants etc. I don't equate queer bashing with the actions of these two blokes (& whichever organisation may have supported them). So I was not suggesting a return to QBing. Instead, I was saying that there is an opportunity for OOF members (who feel strongly about it) to bring a case against any gay hotels that discriminate against straight guests. See my post somewhere above (about 7.05) about the Equality Act.
Of course you have the right to your views - it was never my intention to suggest otherwise, and I'd be interested to understand what I may have written that created that impression.
"I fear you may be ..." - OK, fair point, on reflection this is weaselly - not intended to be a veiled threat. Substitute the more assertive "I think you are being discriminatory on grounds of sexual orientation here. A person's willingness to stand up for their rights is not a function of their sexual orientation."
K
EDIT - your fourth point - for the avoidance of doubt, IMO gay hotels which discriminate against heterosexuals are in the wrong - they have to keep up and provide the same service to all. But there's an important difference here between "discriminating against" and "catering for". If they want to "cater for", let them go ahead and do it. Just like Christian hotels, etc etc - if it's just a difference of taste and style, that's what diversity is all about. Provided it does not treat anyone unfairly.
'Straights' booking into a 'gays only' hotel? All the pillows would have bite holes in 'em surely! ::)
-
Having glanced around this post, think I will leave it alone....bit like global warming..... ::) ::) ::)
Where did that bus thread get to?.... :(
-
Having glanced around this post, think I will leave it alone....bit like global warming..... ::) ::) ::)
Where did that bus thread get to?.... :(
it melted.