Gay couple turned away from B&B in Cookham , page 1

Gay couple turned away from B&B in Cookham

news.bbc.co.uk

Under the Equality Act 2006 it is illegal to discriminate against people on the grounds of sexual orientation.

Ms Wilkinson told the BBC: "They gave me no prior warning and I couldn't offer them another room as I was fully booked.

"I don't see why I should change my mind and my beliefs I've held for years just because the government should force it on me.

"I am not a hotel, I am a guest house and this is a private house."

Mr Black and Mr Morgan were in the village, near Maidenhead, to meet some friends for dinner and to see a local play.

Mr Black told the BBC: "We're tw

(visit the link for the full news article)

Well here is another case of discrimination. I for one don't see why the woman would have turned these gentlemen away. She claims that they gave her no prior warning of their status and she believes that the government cannot force her to accommodate a same sex couple.

While it is true that it is a private residence this borders on the government being able to dictate what you can and cannot allow to go on with regards to your business. A baffling case for sure!

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Gay couple turned away from B&B by Christian owners 'Shocked and embarrassed' pair say they felt treated like lepers and reported matter to police

"We are Christians and we believe our rights don't have to be subordinated. We have religious freedom and we are not judging that but we are not prepared to have that sort of activity under our roof," he said. "These people are very organised and we have already been inundated with abusive calls and emails. It is really sad that people act like that." Thames Valley police said: "We are aware of the incident … The call has been logged as a homophobic incident. As the people live outside of the force area, we have asked Cambridgeshire constabulary to speak to the individuals concerned."

www.guardian.co.uk...

I wanted to add another source as well. This is actually a really good case of discrimination. Either the Christian business owners broke the law or the gay couple were wrong by not notifying the business before hand. This is quite a showdown.

reply to post by jackflap

---

I agree with her. This is her private residence and she should not be forced to accept anyone she does not want to accept, period. I think she's being foolish in her beliefs, but it is her business. Descrimination? It is not discrimination in a public sense. If this woman believes that homosexuals engage in morally objectionable conduct she should not be required to let them stay in her home.

There used to be a legal concept of freedom of association and if making decisions about who can or can not stay in your home is outside of your control, what is?

This kind of thing is absurd in that by making something like this considered discrimination it devalues the real discrimination that is out there.

reply to post by dolphinfan

---

Yes but you are forgetting that

Under the Equality Act 2006 it is illegal to discriminate against people on the grounds of sexual orientation.

So my question is, does this apply to her private residence that is also a business?

Did she in fact break the law by discriminating against these gentlemen because of their sexual orientation? Does she have an argument by claiming that she is a Christian and has rights too?

Personally, I would have let them have a room and told them to have fun. What would I care as long as they are paying customers? Who knows, they might have actually had a pleasant time and referred more clientele. It was silly on the business owner's part in my opinion.

reply to post by dolphinfan

---

All this nonsense about it being her personal home becomes null and void when it is operating as a business.

reply to post by jackflap

---

I get it and agree with you, I would have given them the room. I think the personal property rights trump the civil rights issue. She should be able to turn away anyone she wants for what ever reason since it is her home. Those gents could go somewhere else to sleep. She has one house and should be able to dictate who sleeps in it.

Originally posted by TokiTheDestroyer
reply to post by dolphinfan

---

All this nonsense about it being her personal home becomes null and void when it is operating as a business.

Apparently you have never seen a sign in a business that says:

"We reserve the right to refuse service".

reply to post by leo123

---

You could honestly say the same thing about most any group of people.

Come to think of it, not once in my entire life has a gay person ever tried to convert me, and I know plenty.

Maybe you should rethink your stance on this issue, try coming at it from the point of 'equality for all'

reply to post by leo123

---

Yes but there is a set criteria for refusal of service.

Last time I checked, homosexuality was no where near that list.

Originally posted by TokiTheDestroyer
reply to post by leo123

---

You could honestly say the same thing about most any group of people.

Come to think of it, not once in my entire life has a gay person ever tried to convert me, and I know plenty.

Maybe you should rethink your stance on this issue, try coming at it from the point of 'equality for all'

Nor likely has a gay asked to sleep and potentially have sex with his partner in your home.

It may not bother you, but I guarantee you it would significantly bother many.

reply to post by leo123

---

Even having a sign that says you reserve the right to refuse service does not allow you to refuse service on the basis of certain things. In the US ;

www.legalzoom.com...

The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

In Canada, they may have different rules, and in the UK, as the article clearly states, homosexuality is another class you cant discriminate against.

reply to post by leo123

---

Valid point, but I am not offering up my home as a place of business.
That changes things quite a bit.

Originally posted by TokiTheDestroyer
reply to post by leo123

---

Yes but there is a set criteria for refusal of service.

Last time I checked, homosexuality was no where near that list.

What "list" are you referring to?

I am unaware of some "list" when it comes to, "We reserve the right to refuse service".

reply to post by leo123

---

Try and refuse service to a black person and see how far you get with that before the NAACP royally reams you.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by leo123

---

Even having a sign that says you reserve the right to refuse service does not allow you to refuse service on the basis of certain things. In the US ;

www.legalzoom.com...

The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

In Canada, they may have different rules, and in the UK, as the article clearly states, homosexuality is another class you cant discriminate against.

I somehow doubt the law would have any problem with a B&B owner rejecting a man bringing in a whore if they found it morally against their Christian an other religious beliefs.

I see no difference here. It was and is against their religious beliefs to have gays sleep together in their home.



[edit on 22-3-2010 by leo123]

Originally posted by TokiTheDestroyer
reply to post by leo123

---

Try and refuse service to a black person and see how far you get with that before the NAACP royally reams you.

This is a religious belief issue, so race has no bearing here.

Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 3 days ago with 83 member flags

Google announces privacy settings change across products; users can\'t opt out
  Posted 16 days ago with 78 member flags

Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 5 days ago with 72 member flags

Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 16 days ago with 67 member flags

FDA\'s New Claim: "Your Body Is a Drug—and We Have the Authority to Regulate It"
  Posted 8 days ago with 53 member flags

Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 4 days ago with 49 member flags

BREAKING: Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran\'s nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC
  Posted 1 days ago with 48 member flags

Bill Gates Backs Climate Scientists Lobbying For Large-Scale Geoengineering
  Posted 3 days ago with 40 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: