Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think you shouldn't have to accommodate gay / unmarried couples?

407 replies

moogstera1 · 19/10/2012 09:18

Re. the b and b owners who have been fined for refusing to allow a gay couple to share a room.
From what I can gather, they are committed Christians who do not allow hetero or homosexual unmarried couples to share a room.
The gay couple deliberatly chose this B and B as they knew they would be refused a shared room and wanted to make a legal point.
They were offered 2 seperate rooms but refused.
So, despite personally not being at all religious and not caring if someone wants to share their bed with whoever they choose, AIBU to think that in their own home, they can choose to uphold their values ( which seem to be consistent as regards no unmarried couples.)

OP posts:
Original poster
moogstera1 · 19/10/2012 09:47

freaky there have been many cases where chemists have refused to serve the morning after pill, likewise many gp's who will not help a woman have a termination, and that has not led to prosecution as it is against their beliefs ( again, not saying I think that's right, but their religious beliefs are respected)

OP posts:
SackGirl · 19/10/2012 09:49

THEY DIDNT REFUSE A BED FOR A NIGHT... ONLY A DOUBLE BED

SackGirl · 19/10/2012 09:51

I find it funny that you are all fighting against discrimination yet you are all discriminating a religion - you see religion as a choice... but that isn't always the case. Yet if I were to say being gay is a choice I'd be flamed (I don't think that by the way as I'm not a dumbass) just think it's funny you are all fine with one discrimination, but not another.

fluffyraggies · 19/10/2012 09:52

It may be argued that their religion isn't a choice.

But opening a B&B was!

EdithWeston · 19/10/2012 09:52

I agree with fork

As they admitted not checking the marital status of their hetero guests, they don't have a leg to stand on.

And unless you are running religious establishment (eg convent, monastery, or other) providing retreats or other accommodation where the religious setting is important to what is on offer, then an attempt to regulate people's moral choices is pretty off anyhow.

Bogeyface · 19/10/2012 09:53

I think they are idiots but, they have the right to refuse to take a booking based on whatever criteria they choose. Their idiocy was in publicising the fact that they would refused based on sexuality.

If they dont want gay people to stay then it would be easy to ensure they had enough information to make a reasonable guess on whether someone is gay or not when they take the booking. What they did was bloody stupid but they do have the right to refuse service if they choose to.

Pagwatch · 19/10/2012 09:53

I had heard too that the couple chose the B&B to deliberately challenge their 'christian ethos' which makes them a bit cunty IMHO. It doesn't make them wrong though.

I would have thought that millions of kind, empathetic and reasonable Christians are pretty miffed by this nonsense, not least since their current flag bearer is Nick Griffin.

All the Christians I know personally are lovely warm generous people. They must be weeping at how they are being portrayed.

eBook · 19/10/2012 09:53

there have been many cases where chemists have refused to serve the morning after pill, likewise many gp's who will not help a woman have a termination, and that has not led to prosecution as it is against their beliefs

I think those are disgraceful attitudes too, and should not be allowed. The morning-after-pill and terminations are legal. A doctor/chemist who doesn't want to deal with these should find a different job.

FreakySnuckerCupidStunt · 19/10/2012 09:54

'I find it funny that you are all fighting against discrimination yet you are all discriminating a religion.'

Forcing someone to treat other people as equals is not discrimination.

SackGirl · 19/10/2012 09:54

this coming from someone who disagrees with religion as a whole as it causes more harm than good in my eyes, however i'm not as blind as to realise how suppresive religions can be. I just don't think you're all getting the point, they didn't refuse the gay couple business, they asked for a compromise as they were fearful of their religion, if anyone in this situation was out of order it was the couple, for purposely trying to make people feel uncomfortable.

DontmindifIdo · 19/10/2012 09:54

OP - children aren't a group protected from discrimination. Once the law was changed so that companies couldn't discriminate on grounds of sexuality, the B&B owners had a choice to make, they could either stop refusing the custom of gay couples or they could close/sell their business - as I said, I believe if you hold a strong faith in a particular way, you should be prepared to make sacrifices for it. In this case, they should have closed/sold the business. They chose instead to knowingly break the law in a hope that their faith would be enough to get away with it.

SackGirl · 19/10/2012 09:54

but you seem to be completely unempathetic to the fear they have? why do you think they choose to feel fearful?

sleepyhead · 19/10/2012 09:55

But they're not being discriminated against because of their religion, sackgirl. They are being treated exactly the same as any other business owner else, which is surely the absolute opposite to discrimination Confused.

Pharmacists and GPs have a special exemption by law to allow them to opt out of contraception/abortion. Personally I think it's wrong, but it's not unlawful.

FreakySnuckerCupidStunt · 19/10/2012 09:55

I can't find any reference to them having deliberately chosen a Christian hotel, actually. So until it's substantiated, I'll assume it's not true.

SackGirl · 19/10/2012 09:55

' could either stop refusing the custom of gay couples or they could close/sell their business' they didnt' refuse business of the couple

mrsfuzzy · 19/10/2012 09:55

trock, politics and religion are mostly to blame in history up to current day for wars and civil unrest in the world so you make a very valid point.

sleepyhead · 19/10/2012 09:56

Christianity does not say that you'll go to hell if you facilitate a sexual encounter between two men.

eBook · 19/10/2012 09:56

if anyone in this situation was out of order it was the couple, for purposely trying to make people feel uncomfortable.

Challenging discrimination always involves making bigots feel uncomfortable, doesn't it?

Mrsjay · 19/10/2012 09:56

But opening a B&B was!

this

I have nothing against peoples religious beliefs but do not open a B & B expecting people to fall into the owners beliefs, if it was stated as a christian B and B and only married hetrosexual couples allowed to share beds then that would be fine,

Bogeyface · 19/10/2012 09:56

GPs who have a moral or religious objection to abortion are asked to refer a patient to another doctor. I dont see anything wrong with the doctors being allowed to do that.

SHRIIIEEEKPoolingBearBlood · 19/10/2012 09:57

Not at all. If a gay couple opened a b and b and refused to allow Christians to stay I'd be saying exactly the same. Your logic is very flawed sackgirl

FreakySnuckerCupidStunt · 19/10/2012 09:57

but you seem to be completely unempathetic to the fear they have? why do you think they choose to feel fearful?

You're right, I am completely unsympathetic to their fear. Their fears do not give them the right to discriminate against other people. If they're that terrified of what gawd'll do to them if they treat gay people equally, then they shouldn't be running a business where they may potentially have to cater for gay people.

Mrsjay · 19/10/2012 09:57

How can people who own something like that preach the rights and wrongs of who can sleep together It is just daft,

Ciske · 19/10/2012 09:58

So, OP, are you also saying Rosa Parks was wrong to take a seat at the front of the bus, as there were plenty of seats in the back to choose from? And it wasn't fair to deliberately challenge the racist views of the bus driver, as he was entitled to have his racist views respected?

TwoIfBySea · 19/10/2012 09:58

Although I strongly believe that the B&B owners are in the wrong business if they want to be fussy (right enough I've met a fair few sour-faced B&B owners so maybe not) I also believe that people should be allowed to exercise their right in some capacity.

They should have advertised themselves (maybe they did) as ultra-Christian and then no one would have wanted to book!

We are becoming far to litigious in this country, at the least wee thing.