It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gay Couple Win B&B Discrimination Case

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
I think this is the right verdict in this case.
I'm glad that this couple's "Religious beliefs" didn't win out over the law and common sense and decency.
They discriminated against this couple pure and simple and have now had to deal with the consequences.

This is being hotly debated by the media and I'm keen to learn what fellow ATS members think.


The problem I have with this is partly caused by a member of my family who is in support of this case.

The problem being that they will rant about how it is shocking that the B&B discriminated against a homosexual couple yet they run a B&B for female's and lesbian couples only, they have refused to allow married couples and males only into the bed and breakfast that they run and do not get any problems for doing so. Do not get me wrong, they do not hang a sign on the door or advertise it like this, they simply tell heterosexual couples or male guests both gay or straight that there are no rooms available when they call to reserve a room.

It grates on my nerves, everyone wants their cake and to eat it but the way I see it is, it is either one way, anyone allowed in B&B's or defined rules as each B&B wants it for their own businesses.

Right now, the problem is that everything as usual is blurred, it always will be as it causes more conflict that way.


edit on 11-2-2012 by XXXN3O because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


Court rulings like this create added emphasis on the need for the development of faster than light space travel. That way those who disagree with the atheist/homosexual agenda can simply end all the arguments and leave. The West has become filled with overly tolerant cowards.
edit on 11-2-2012 by korathin because: substituted the word "add" for the word "create", first sentence.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   
Wow in a country that was based and founded on religion you can no longer take a stand for something your religion is agianst without getting slapped with a civil suit. That is why this country is going to s# we have let "law" and "equal rights" take over morals.

and before you start flaming the equal rights comment has nothing to do with race, it has to do with immoral people forcing those who still have morals to accept their immoral life style which is s# It was wrong and immoral when this country started and it is still wrong and immoral now.



posted on May, 7 2012 @ 07:11 AM
link   
reply to post by JROCK2527
 


You mean like an immoral religious lifestyle?



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Some great news

Pleased to update that these "friendly, Christ-Like" Christians LOST their Supreme Court Appeal.

www.independent.co.uk...

www.bbc.co.uk...





The Christian owners of guest house have been ordered pay thousands of pounds in damages after they refused to allow a gay couple to share a double room.

Peter and Hazelmary Bull had asked the Supreme Court to decide whether their decision to refuse to let Martyn Hall and his civil partner Steven Preddy stay at their Cornwall guest house constituted sexual discrimination.

Five Supreme Court justices ruled against them today after analysing the case at a hearing in London in October.

The couple have previously lost fights in a County Court and the Court of Appeal. In 2011 a judge at Bristol County Court concluded that the Bulls acted unlawfully and ordered them to pay a total of £3,600 damages. In 2012 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by the Bulls following a hearing in London. The couple had asked the Supreme Court to overrule the Court of Appeal.

The Bulls said they thought that any sex outside marriage was "a sin" - and denied discriminating against Mr Hall and Mr Preddy. They said their decision was founded on a "religiously-informed judgment of conscience". Mr Hall and Mr Preddy said they were victims of discrimination.

After the ruling, Mrs Bull said: "We are deeply disappointed and saddened by the outcome."



And why they Lost?


Dismissing the appeal, Lady Hale, deputy president of the Supreme Court, said: "Sexual orientation is a core component of a person's identity which requires fulfilment through relationships with others of the same orientation."

Homosexuals "were long denied the possibility of fulfilling themselves through relationships with others", she said, adding: "This was an affront to their dignity as human beings which our law has now (some would say belatedly) recognised.

"Homosexuals can enjoy the same freedom and the same relationships as any others. But we should not under-estimate the continuing legacy of those centuries of discrimination, persecution even, which is still going on in many parts of the world.

"It is no doubt for that reason that Strasbourg requires 'very weighty reasons' to justify discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation.

"It is for that reason that we should be slow to accept that prohibiting hotel-keepers from discriminating against homosexuals is a disproportionate limitation on their right to manifest their religion."



Exactly...





They will now have to pay the £3,600 damages to the gay couple that they discriminated against and they are finally getting what they deserve... JUSTICE.

Well done the UK Justice system, they don't get a lot right but this is spot on.

Well done.


edit on 27/11/13 by blupblup because: (no reason given)

edit on 27/11/13 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by JROCK2527
 


Not quite sure what you're on about.... The UK was based on and founded under a religion, was it? News to me...

And what makes them "immoral", exactly? The Judges throughout this case have actually made it quite clear their job isn't to enforce morality, so regardless whether you think that being gay is immoral or not, the law says that you cannot be discriminated against.

I'm sure you;d be up in arms if I barred Christians from a business I ran, because I regard their behaviour and ethics as "immoral"....



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 09:34 AM
link   

korathin
reply to post by blupblup
 


Court rulings like this create added emphasis on the need for the development of faster than light space travel. That way those who disagree with the atheist/homosexual agenda can simply end all the arguments and leave. The West has become filled with overly tolerant cowards.
edit on 11-2-2012 by korathin because: substituted the word "add" for the word "create", first sentence.




Not sure why you're linking atheist and homosexuality together, like they're together?
I think ANYONE from ANY group who is tolerant of others, saw this as awful behaviour from the B&B owners.

If we're kicking people off the planet, I'd vote we kick out the religious zealots, bigots, homophobes, racists....just nasty people and leave the rest of us to get along.

I think that's fairer.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


Quite - into the sun, perhaps?

Imagine what a peaceful world we'd live in without all the religious and bigoted idiots that currently reside here!

I am also puzzled why he lumped Atheism and Homosexuality together... I don't believe in God, certainly not the Judeo-Christian concept anyway, but I also don't fancy blokes...



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 11:00 AM
link   

XXXN3O
they run a B&B for female's and lesbian couples only, they have refused to allow married couples and males only into the bed and breakfast that they run and do not get any problems for doing so. Do not get me wrong, they do not hang a sign on the door or advertise it like this, they simply tell heterosexual couples or male guests both gay or straight that there are no rooms available when they call to reserve a room.

Which only goes to show that just cuz you're gay, doesn't mean you can't be wrong, too.
Why not ask them why they 'set' that policy and report back? It would be an interesting adjunct to this conversation.

We stayed in a gay-run B&B this past summer, and it was perhaps the nicest place we've experienced. I am also friends with a female couple who run one, and they have no gay-only policy. So I wonder what's behind your scenario?



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   

stumason
reply to post by blupblup
 


Quite - into the sun, perhaps?

Imagine what a peaceful world we'd live in without all the religious and bigoted idiots that currently reside here!

I am also puzzled why he lumped Atheism and Homosexuality together... I don't believe in God, certainly not the Judeo-Christian concept anyway, but I also don't fancy blokes...




The Sun would be as good a place as any mate.
And yes, the bigots and idiots certainly ruined ATS for me (and many others) so I barely bother coming here these days.
I wanted to check if anyone was talking about this, also the Slaves/Communist commune thing and a couple of other stories... but as usual, no British stories anywhere... just all Comet crap and "The end is nigh"

So it's easier to read other sites.

although to be fair, it seems much better in terms of extremism but I don't know, I don't read hear for any extended period so maybe it's just as bad... who knows.

And yes... sadly a lot of these kinds of people like to lump groups together.
They just see all of these different groups as one enemy... it's easier, stops them from having to think.

Much like "jesus did it" or "the lord works in mysterious ways" stops people having to think about life and asking deep questions and so on.

edit on 27/11/13 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


I noticed a few days ago a distinct lack of British flavour round here and not for the first time - all stories pertaining to non stories in the US about some cop or another, or the damned comet, but nothing about Gibraltar or the Slavery case..

I did post a thread about Gibraltar, I may do the same about the Slavery one unless you want the honours?


(post by blupblup removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


So, the rights of the Gay couple trump the rights of the owners of the business.

The flushing sound is getting louder, as we circle the toilet.

This is ridiculous on so many levels.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


No, it doesn't trump their "rights" because they have NO RIGHT to refuse service based on religious or sexual orientation grounds, or for that matter race and disability's.

The couple who owned the B&B actually stated they refused because they believed all sex outside of marriage is immoral, therefore they would have refused me and my partner service despite us being together for 7 years. It isn't their business to determine who can sleep with whom.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


So again, the special class of people get to dictate what others can and can't do. Sorry, that is wrong.
The rights of the Gay Couple do in fact trump that of the Business Owners.

I as a business owner, do, by the Constitution, have the right to operate MY business in the manner I see fit.
The idea that just because the business is open to the public, does not then mean that they are not afforded the right to refuse service.
The fact that the Govt can force individuals to not only accept others, while it is against personal beliefs, is Tyranny by any other name.
It is wrong to deny service to people based on such stupid things. A gay mans money is just as green as the straight man in my mind.

But......If I don't want to do business with someone, regardless or what ever reason, that is my personal right as defined by the documents used to create the country and the Govt.

So, yes. The rights of the Gay couple have trumped, via the Govt, the rights of the business owner.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   

stumason
It isn't their business to determine who can sleep with whom.

So, it is your business to tell people where you can though, right??

Hypocritical is the term you are looking for.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


I mean this is the nicest possible way, but your 200-odd year old bit of parchment written by rich landowners has no bearing on this case or in fact any case in the UK.

In the UK (and the rest of the EU) you cannot refuse service based on issues of sex, race, religion or disability. End of story.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


Oh, so it is a situation within the UK. My apologizes then.
I make it a habit not to stick my nose in the business of other countries.

My mistake.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   

curious7
I'm glad the right decision was made because it shows how biased and bigoted religion can be to discriminate against a gay couple who are in a civil partnership and happen to want a B&B to stay in for the night. I shook my head in dismay though when I saw the press conference after the ruling and she stated that the fine and compensation was helped by others who sent in donations to help them fight the legal case, proving that homophobia is alive and well in modern Britain.


I absolutely agree with the court ruling as it's as plain as the nose on your face that it is wrong to deny service to law-abiding customers based on something as arbitary as sexuality, race or any other minor factor. It's just wrong in this day and age - and the British courts rightfully agree and are willing to back that position.

However, I don't think the couple who own the guesthouse are necessarily bigots in the truest sense. Regardless of what you think personally, homosexuality is expressly forbidden in The Bible so I can appreciate that Christians who adhere to it fairly literally might have problems accepting the possibility of such things happening in their own premises - even if they are more accepting of it in a wider sense. I think that's stupid personally, but I have some sympathy for those that might feel differently.

In any event, it might well be the case that hospitality isn't the right career for this couple if they still disagree with the court's ruling. I would also rather hope the gay couple might think to donate their compensation to some gay rights charity too after covering their expenses.
edit on 27-11-2013 by KingIcarus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   

macman
So, the rights of the Gay couple trump the rights of the owners of the business.


Absolute nonsense, I'm afraid. The UK and EU (and I suspect America too) have core laws concerning discrimination on the basis of race, gender, sexuality, disability etc. These laws simply ensure that every human being is entitled to fair treatment based on the traits they were born with. I can see no possible argument with that.

If you are unable to trade whilst adhering to those core laws, you shouldn't be trading. It's a simple as that.

Of course, a more shrewd businessman would simply find another reason to refuse service. If I owned a guesthouse and didn't want gay couples staying in it, I would simply contact people making double room bookings for two men or two women and tell them there'd been a mistake and we were fully booked. No fuss, no muss.

It's dishonest of course, but it causes no offence.







 
12
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join