Corvette Forum : DigitalCorvettes.com Corvette Forums banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A superbly written piece, accurately capturing the plight and concerns of both stances.



A Christian couple have lost a court battle over their refusal to -allow a homosexual -couple to share a room at their B&B, and have been -ordered to pay them £3,600 in damages. Is this just?

Many will sympathise with the homosexual couple, Steven Preddy and his civil partner Martyn Hall. They had travelled all the way from Bristol to stay at the Chymorvah Private Hotel in the delightful coastal town of Marazion in Cornwall.

Arguably their suspicions should have been raised when they made a booking at a hotel which boasts on its website that it is a ‘family house’ and ‘a -family-run business run for -families’, though there was no requirement to inspect the website.
Devout: Peter and Hazelmary Bull lost their court case this week after they refused to allow a gay couple a room because of their religious beliefs - but whose right was greater?

One can imagine the feelings of -Steven and Martyn when they were asked to occupy two separate rooms on their arrival. They were looking -forward to an enjoyable break together, and did not expect to be on the -receiving end of what they interpreted as a gross act of prejudice.

Others will side with Peter and Hazelmary Bull, who have owned and run their small B&B for 25 years. They are devout Christians and, like many of their faith, though probably no longer the majority in this country, have -reservations about sexual -relations between homosexuals, as they do about such relations between unmarried heterosexuals, based on their reading of the Bible.

Indeed, their website, which of course Steven Preddy and Martyn Hall may not have read, makes plain their views: ‘We have few rules but please note that out of a deep regard for -marriage we prefer to let double accommodation to heterosexual -married couples only.’

So whose right is the greater — that of the homosexual couple to sleep together in the same bed or that of the Christian couple to order the conduct that takes place in their B&B, which is also the family home? Judge Andrew Rutherford found in favour of Steven and Martyn under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, though he gave the Bulls the right to appeal.

The judge may be correct in his -interpretation of the Act. If he is, the question is whether the Act is a fair one. Is it right to force a couple to accept that behaviour can take place in Chymorvah Private Hotel which for deeply held -reasons of faith they find abhorrent?
Victory: Steven Preddy (left) and Martin Hall may have won the case, but why did they not simply go elsewhere when they were told that they could not stay together?

Reading some of the hundreds of online postings written about this case, I am struck by the enormous gulf between the Bulls’ supporters and their detractors. In particular, their Christian beliefs about what constitutes proper sexual -behaviour — beliefs which would have been shared by a majority of Christians in this country 30 or 40 years ago, and probably by a majority of non-Christians — are often -represented as narrow, bigoted and medieval.

But those who criticise the Bulls on these grounds are surely missing the point. The Bulls’ views, however obnoxious they may seem to some secularly minded people and even to some other Christians, nonetheless reflect traditional Christian teaching and, so far as I can see, the current -teaching of the Roman -Catholic Church.

The issue is not whether Peter and Hazelmary Bull are right or wrong. It is whether they have the right to live their lives according to their beliefs in their own home, which is -admittedly also a B&B. We should be very cautious about taking away that right.

Some people have drawn -parallels with landladies in 1950s London who put up signs in their windows saying ‘No blacks’. But such a prohibition, though actually legal in those days, was not supported by mainstream Christian churches in this country or validated by biblical study. It was prejudice pure and simple — nasty, mean and cruel — and not a question of faith.

One could certainly argue that the Bulls were doctrinaire in insisting that Steven and -Martyn could not share the same room. The visitors’ sensible response would have been to say that they would in any case prefer not to stay in a B&B run by such narrow-minded people, and they would take their custom to one of the many other establishments with which Marazion is blessed.

I admit it is a complicating factor that Chymorvah Private Hotel should not only be the Bulls’ home but a hotel, presumably licensed by the local authority. But it is first and foremost their home, as is often the case with B&Bs, and, according to Hazelmary Bull, doesn’t even make a profit. If Steven and Martyn had been treated in this way by a Holiday Inn or a Hilton, I would side with them.

Moreover, it seems anomalous that while the Bulls or any other owners of a B&B can legally deny a double bed to an unmarried heterosexual couple, they are on the wrong side of the law when they act in the same way towards a homosexual couple, though it is true that Steven and Martyn are in a civil partnership.

Why did they not simply shrug their shoulders, reflect that it takes all sorts to make the world, and go off to another B&B? We can’t be sure. Perhaps they were genuinely upset, and reported the matter to the police because they had been shocked by their treatment.
House first, hotel second: Stephen Glover argues that the issue created by the ruling is more about the right of people to act out their beliefs inside their own home, rater than whether the Bulls are right or wrong

House first, hotel second: Stephen Glover argues that the issue created by the ruling is more about the right of people to act out their beliefs inside their own home, rater than whether the Bulls are right or wrong

But is it possible that they got the reaction they -wanted? A month before Steven and -Martyn turned up in -September 2008, the Bulls were sent a -letter by Stonewall, the gay rights -organisation, saying that it had received a complaint, and warning them that they were breaking the law.

Such ‘stings’ are not unknown in this field. Recently a homosexual claiming to be seeking treatment visited a controversial therapist called Lesley -Pilkington who says she can ‘cure’ homosexuality. In fact he was an undercover journalist and gay rights campaigner who wanted to discredit Mrs Pilkington.

If Steven Preddy and Martyn Hall had deliberately ambushed the Bulls, the balance of my sympathy would swing further away from them. Here was a harmless and impecunious -elderly couple, holding views which may be represented as narrow but are nonetheless rooted in faith, minding their own business.

Fortunately for the Bulls, their £45,000 legal costs were met by the Christian Institute and donations from other Christians, whereas the costs of -Steven and Martyn were underwritten by a Government quango, the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The Bulls would certainly have been in a financial pickle if -sympathisers had not helped out. Was it humane to subject them to a process that might have led to financial ruin?

Without doubt they were inflexible, but they had not been cruel. I suggest that -Steven and Martyn showed a lack of mercy in pursuing this case as they did, and the mercilessness was all the greater if they were -acting on behalf of Stonewall.

Homosexuals have been persecuted in the past, and that was wrong. But past misdeeds do not legitimise the harrying of elderly Christians, who in their way comprise a persecuted minority all of their own.

This is a story about toleration — or lack of it. The Bulls may not have been very -tolerant of a homosexual couple, but they were acting in their own home, and by the lights of their faith. Steven Preddy and -Martyn Hall, supported by Stonewall, funded by the Equality and Human Rights Commission — and now vindicated by the law — do not tole

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1348790/Gay-couple-sued-Christian-hotel-owners-staying-true-faith-right.html#ixzz1BbfwYR4t
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Well they were upfront with their policies so its not like its a surprise and its not like they told them to get the hell out, just to sleep in separate rooms so its not like they were uncaring. Why should they be forced to pay the people who stayed at that there place 3k? it makes no sense. If they didnt like it they could have gone elsewhere not like they were forced to stay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Openly living the lifestyle is not enough. They wish to force all in to acceptance of their chosen lifestyle. Intolerance is draconian... unless that intolerant is toward your beliefs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,253 Posts
Britain is even more into political correctness than we are.
Here is an excerpt from an article about the government mental health system paying for a 21 year old mental health patient to go to Holland for a prostitute to help him learn about his sexuality in a safe environment:

"Plucked at random from The Daily Mail: A man of twenty-one with learning disabilities has been granted taxpayers’ money to fly to Amsterdam and have sex with a prostitute. Why not? His social worker says sex is a “human right” and that his client, being a virgin, is entitled to the support of the state in claiming said right. Fortunately, a £520 million program was set up by Her Majesty’s Government to “empower those with disabilities.” “He’s planning to do more than just have his end away,” explained the social worker.
“The girls in Amsterdam are far more protected than those on U.K. streets. Let him have some fun—I’d want to. Wouldn’t you prefer that we can control this, guide him, educate him, support him to understand the process and ultimately end up satisfying his needs in a secure, licensed place where his happiness and growth as a person is the most important thing? Refusing to offer him this service would be a violation of his human rights.”​
And so a Dutch prostitute is able to boast that among her clients is the British Government. Talk about outsourcing: given the reputation of English womanhood, you’d have thought this would be the one job that wouldn’t have to be shipped overseas. But, as Dutch hookers no doubt say, lie back and think of England—and the check they’ll be mailing you."

Link: http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/Dependence-Day-6753
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Britain is even more into political correctness than we are.
Here is an excerpt from an article about the government mental health system paying for a 21 year old mental health patient to go to Holland for a prostitute to help him learn about his sexuality in a safe environment:

"Plucked at random from The Daily Mail: A man of twenty-one with learning disabilities has been granted taxpayers’ money to fly to Amsterdam and have sex with a prostitute. Why not? His social worker says sex is a “human right” and that his client, being a virgin, is entitled to the support of the state in claiming said right. Fortunately, a £520 million program was set up by Her Majesty’s Government to “empower those with disabilities.” “He’s planning to do more than just have his end away,” explained the social worker.
“The girls in Amsterdam are far more protected than those on U.K. streets. Let him have some fun—I’d want to. Wouldn’t you prefer that we can control this, guide him, educate him, support him to understand the process and ultimately end up satisfying his needs in a secure, licensed place where his happiness and growth as a person is the most important thing? Refusing to offer him this service would be a violation of his human rights.”​
And so a Dutch prostitute is able to boast that among her clients is the British Government. Talk about outsourcing: given the reputation of English womanhood, you’d have thought this would be the one job that wouldn’t have to be shipped overseas. But, as Dutch hookers no doubt say, lie back and think of England—and the check they’ll be mailing you."

Link: http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/Dependence-Day-6753
I wish my doctor could right me a prescription like that... " one ZR1 corvette and 3weeks @ playboy mansion 4x a year"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
That's noting... California pays for part of federal workers "gender reassignment" operations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
That's noting... California pays for part of federal workers "gender reassignment" operations.
I dont know about you, but i'd make one ugly chick:smack... how is that a necessary operation? I dont ever want to think about it its so mind bogglingly stupid:WTF:thud:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,611 Posts
Humans, by nature, like to persecute humans. Any excuse is therefore appropriate.

I'm afraid that devout Christians are going to be on the receiving end for some time to come now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Discussion Starter #11

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Humans, by nature, like to persecute humans. Any excuse is therefore appropriate.

I'm afraid that devout Christians are going to be on the receiving end for some time to come now.

No, no... the old couple was prosecuted... It was their beliefs that were persecuted.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,241 Posts
Meh. The B&B people need to lighten up. The definition of 'family' is changing. If they don't want to change, and the law requires them to, then they can shut down. That's life. that's democracy. That's business. Change with the regulations or perish.

Not making any comment as to the validity of their beliefs as they are irrelavent.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Meh. The B&B people need to lighten up. The definition of 'family' is changing. If they don't want to change, and the law requires them to, then they can shut down. That's life. that's democracy. That's business. Change with the regulations or perish.

Not making any comment as to the validity of their beliefs as they are irrelavent.
As a business owner, I feel I can refuse service to anyone, for any reason, as long as I don't discriminate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Meh. The B&B people need to lighten up. The definition of 'family' is changing. If they don't want to change, and the law requires them to, then they can shut down. That's life. that's democracy. That's business. Change with the regulations or perish.

Not making any comment as to the validity of their beliefs as they are irrelevant.
Nothing for me to agree with here. In fact... the very opposite belief is held by me and the majority, around the world. It's not democracy... it's fiat. We've tried democracy. Britain is no different. The definition of family is not changing... it's being forced upon us. Two dudes with the same fetish... is not a family. You want to perform a sexual act on some dude... go right ahead. Preform it on two of them for all I care. But do not expect me to have to tolerate or accept your way of life. I have every bit the right as you do... not to have to accept your way of life...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,241 Posts
As a business owner, I feel I can refuse service to anyone, for any reason, as long as I don't discriminate.
What if these guys were not gay, but just wanted a Man-cation as friends? Would they be informed of and have the rules likewise enforced? I would say no. Women go on such vacations all the time as friends. As soon as it is a guy, people get all assumptive and willy.

In America, once you rent a space, you own it for the duration of the contract. As long as you do no damage, do not create a ruckus, or break the law you are allowed to do whatever you wish with the space. Might be the same law over there. Might not be.

And refusing or enforcing rules differently is discrimination in this instance. These folks do not force anyone but gays to sleep separate. That's discrimination.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,914 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
What if these guys were not gay, but just wanted a Man-cation as friends? Would they be informed of and have the rules likewise enforced? I would say no. Women go on such vacations all the time as friends. As soon as it is a guy, people get all assumptive and willy.

In America, once you rent a space, you own it for the duration of the contract. As long as you do no damage, do not create a ruckus, or break the law you are allowed to do whatever you wish with the space. Might be the same law over there. Might not be.

And refusing or enforcing rules differently is discrimination in this instance. These folks do not force anyone but gays to sleep separate. That's discrimination.
You have a guys night out and sleep with them in the same bed ? The only discrimination here... is perpetrated upon the elderly couple... and their right to believe in scripture.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
31,366 Posts
Nothing for me to agree with here. In fact... the very opposite belief is held by me and the majority, around the world. It's not democracy... it's fiat. We've tried democracy. Britain is no different. The definition of family is not changing... it's being forced upon us. Two dudes with the same fetish... is not a family. You want to perform a sexual act on some dude... go right ahead. Preform it on two of them for all I care. But do not expect me to have to tolerate or accept your way of life. I have every bit the right as you do... not to have to accept your way of life...
Fkn A. :thumbsup:
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top