Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Shackeng]

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

[Amigo]

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.

[albitz]

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.

For the record. I have no religious beliefs whatsoever.

[Debs.]

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!

 .......

[kevinminton]

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

[kevinminton]

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

[kevinminton]

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.

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

[albitz]

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.

[albitz]

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.

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.

[tidla]

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!

 .......

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7uGd-FJuaQ[/media]

[kevinminton]

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.

[scimmy_man]

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

as long as I dont have to join em.

[albitz]

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. :-/

[kevinminton]

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

[albitz]

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 ?