that you shouldn't open a hotel if you only want straight married couples to stay in it?

[JoanofArgos]

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/14/christian-couple-barred-gay-couple-shut-hotel

Horrid old bigots, say I.

I think it's about as true as saying that calling people bigots is generally a left-wing thing, Harpy

I've seen that, I know. Thats fine, there is nothing wrong with looking for a particular clientele, its how far you go.
You don't seem to be able to grasp the fact that the law is for everyone. You are completely free to take a case against "Guyz Hotel" if you feel the need.

What is your point?

Oh for goodness sake, haven't we gone over this about 100 times.

This hotel markets itself as being run by gay people for gay people - this is called niche marketing, it is perfectly legal. However they are obliged by law not to actually refuse entry to non gays - this would be illegal.

Most people understand that gay people are discriminated against and marginalised - this is why it is nice for them to have hotels that they know they will be welcome in.

Heterosexuals are not discriminated against for their sexuality. They do not need hotels run by heteros for heteros because this is what the majority of hotels provide anyway.

I bet there's an even longer than usual enormous queue of homophobes outside Guyz hotel this week, just aching to be turned away. Or maybe they would be too aroused disgusted by the thought of being near those naughty sodomites to try it.

Yes Beachcomber, hence my helpful note earlier in the thread. Do you think we can ask MNHQ to put a note at the top of the thread? :o

I presume you x-posted with me there, TSH :o

No I don't though. I'm saying if they don't, they are open to being sued in the same exact way. Thats called equality.

Are you arguing that the so called christian couple should have the right to discriminate?

yes, it was an extremely hilarious helpful post Elephants - you, um, have a way with words.

Does it actually occur to any of the homophobes here to wonder why gay people might quite like to have hotels with not too many straight people in them?

(Hint - it is related to homophobes.)

I haven't a clue what you are going on about, TSH. But good luck with the cardboard and the magic markers there.

Probably not, Beachcomber, because they already know the answer. I think you are forgetting that gays/Muslims/black people/women rule the world, and thanks to the diabolical Law of PC we are not allowed to talk about it, or about how the poor minority of whites/straights/men/Christians are NOW BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST. The hotel promoting itself as a gay hotel is just the mask slipping for a moment. We all know the gay mafia wants our menfolk.

Beachcomber I think anyone asking why it's ok for gay hotels to market themselves as such should just read the thread to understand.

Elephants I'll add my voice to the general tittering but it was 'pyrite' that got me :)

And Lesley - good post :)

Gosh I know, there they are, all these heterosexuals with most every hotel in the country which welcomes them with open arms, but someone has to spoil it for them by rubbing their poor discriminated against noses in the fact that other people have rights too.

Just looked at the Hotels website, its doen't seem to mention their Christian beliefs, perhaps if it did they couple would have known to get the bargepole out.

It is a 7 bed Hotel not a spare room being rented out as a B&B so proper full on business.

Is this on 'This Morning' as we speak? I just think that these days it is silly to say no to a married couple of the same sex!

Did the owners never think that this situation would ever come up!

It's interesting though isn't it - why this kind of debate always gets people claiming that now White middle class straight men are the victims. Is it guilt turned into resentment? Or is there a bizarre 'romance' or perceived camaraderie attached to being in an opressed group which others want to claim? Or are they just twats?

Not really interesting, Unruly. At least, no more interesting than the sort of "what about meeeeeee?" whining you can hear in any nursery in the country.

Most people -some Christians included- are pretty dumb, though, aren't they?
People are incapable of reducing things down to what they essentially are: marriage being the case here.
When will people get their heads around the fact that marriage need not be about love, procreation, religion or a fancy frock.
If they bothered to think about it, they would reach the (rather obvious) conclusion that what it is in essence is a legal/financial transaction between two consenting adults.
Anything else is what they subjectively add to it in their own minds.
There is no reason at all why gay people should not have option to have same legal/financial rights as married if they choose to do so via civil partnerships.
I don't dislike the hoteliers for being Christians- I dislike them for being morons
in not working this out for themselves.
For not having the basic intelligence to realise that marriage/civil partnerships are the same, so when they say 'married' they MUST legally accept civilly partnered people.

"It's interesting though isn't it - why this kind of debate always gets people claiming that now White middle class straight men are the victims."
There are a lot of people who do it out of resentment no doubt. But as a white heterosexual middle class male, I'm delighted that these people were found to be operating outside the law and think them to be bigotted in the extreme. They of course have every right to be bigotted in their private lives but not if they enter the commercial relm.
However I would equally object to a hotel which reserved it's business exclusively for gay people also (if they exist, it all seems quite anecdotle at the moment.) not because I think I'm an oppressed minority, but because I agree with the jurisprudencial school of thought that one of the main tenants of a law is that it should be coherent and apply to all equally. I'd imagine that a lot of the reason that some feel resentment is the idea or at least their perception is that some laws seem to be checker-board laws which apply to some but not to others.
If you have a law which applies across the board then there is very little room for anyone to complain, so either hotels are allowed to install their own policies and deny rooms to gay/hetero people or they aren't. There now seems to be a perception that it's alright for one group to pick and choose their guests based on sexuality but not for another (as I say before this is all anecdotle and until one of the hotels in question is brought to court we won't know, but going by this thread the perception definitely exists.)

Similar arguments arose over here (ireland) in the Portmarnock golf club case which was pertained to them only having only males as full club members. Now while the legal principles differed in that it was to do with groups/clubs and membership rather than an out and out commercial enterprise my views would remain the same. Either all groups are allowed to select their members based on their own specified criteria or none are.