Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Original poster

to not feel very sorry for these arseholes?

111 replies

lagertops · 19/09/2013 17:44

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2424983/Christian-B-B-owners-refused-gay-couple-close-business.html

Sorry to link the DM, but I'm just so mad after reading this article, especially the 'Best rated' comments.

I wouldn't wish death threats on anyone, but I really feel that if you're going to bring your religion into your (hospitality) livelihood and alienate customers, then duh! It's not very good for business!

'Shivering and hungry.' Do me a favour.

OP posts:

Catsize · 19/09/2013 18:27

Doing a dissertation on same-sex marriage and this case features, so thank you for the link. If you were tuned away from a Christian B&B because of the way God made you, you might feel a little aggrieved and not appreciate the irony. Until people have faced prejudice, it is easy to say 'the couple should have just gone elsewhere'. Imagine driving for miles for a break and then being told 'no room at the inn', only you knew there was, as you had booked it. I suspect their stance has damaged their business rather than enhanced it and it seems there are other reasons behind the closure.

icetip · 19/09/2013 18:28

Flapjack - Christian values are personal, the law if the land is secular and comes first. They brought this on themselves. But no need for fuckwit cyber cowards to post death threats etc.

GobbySadcase · 19/09/2013 18:33

All the disclaimers in the world do not exempt them from the law.

If I'd encountered a check in desk with 'Jesus is Lord' in mosaic I'd run for the hills screaming!

Bigots. Couldn't have happened to nicer people.

FlapJackFlossie · 19/09/2013 18:36

If I'd encountered a check in desk with 'Jesus is Lord' in mosaic I'd run for the hills screaming!

This is exactly what their website implied.........but the men STILL had to have a go instead of going elsewhere......with dignity.

Owllady · 19/09/2013 18:44

are you sure they 'had to have a go'? I have read nothing to suggest that happened

GobbySadcase · 19/09/2013 18:47

Y'know what Flapjack?
No they didn't 'have a go'. They reserved a double room in a B&B which by the law of this land they had a right to do.

Thankfully in this case one persons religion does jot overrule the legal rights of another.

I don't agree with the death threats, however.

needasilverlining · 19/09/2013 18:48

To be fair, Flossie, although under no circumstances EVER would I book a room in a hotel which had that message on the website (and I am straight, and married) - in my wildest dreams I wouldn't imagine that level of mosaic'ed lunacy

FlapJackFlossie · 19/09/2013 18:49

They knew before they turned up to book in what the hotel was. They didn't have to go there. They were out to prove themselves right and the owners wrong.........which they have done with devastating consequences.

AlannaPartridge · 19/09/2013 18:50

They BROKE THE LAW, Flapjack. Why do you think this is OK? We have laws for a reason - no one gets to decide which ones they abide by and which ones they don't.

I couldn't care less whether the gay couple "had a go" or not - they had right on their side. You seem to think that, faced with ILLEGAL discrimination they should have tip-toed away with "dignity"? Sod that.

phantomnamechanger · 19/09/2013 18:50

In one sense, I admire the owners, as they stuck to their beliefs in the face of opposition which is not easy, and it has cost them dearly. However, I do see that what they were trying to do, was against the law. In their line of business they should have made sure they KNEW what was/not allowed.

But how can people freely specify other things eg "no smokers" "no kids" "no pets" etc

One holiday firm we have used also says "no single sex parties" - obv they don't want stag/hen groups who may be rowdy, on their boats or in their cottages, but what about a gay couple? Or 2 gay couples, going on holiday together?

OutrageousFlavourLikeFreesias · 19/09/2013 18:50

The B&B owners were breaking the law. It doesn't matter how deeply they feel they were entitled to break the law, or how much they wish the law they broke didn't exist. They law exists, and they broke it. Now they are taking the consequences. Which they richly deserve.

needasilverlining · 19/09/2013 18:51

Devastating consequences which the stupid old bigots brought on themselves by imagining the laws of the land didn't apply to them. Now they, and other bigots, know different.

GobbySadcase · 19/09/2013 18:52

Bollocks.
Once faced with bigotry they took the owners to court.

Are you seriously suggesting that this was their idea of a fun break? Getting kicked out of the B&B?

Many Christians are tolerant of homosexuality - this couple are a minority.

I know what this B&B is too.... It's illegal. They're breaking the law and it is only right they were prosecuted. If they didn't like that they were in the wrong business.

namechangesforthehardstuff · 19/09/2013 18:56

They clearly checked in only so that they could challenge this illegal behaviour. Well good for them.

Your 'with dignity' implying they could have just gone elsewhere quietly is just bollocks. I, for one, am glad that there are people out there who are prepared to take on those who are behaving ILLEGALLY so that in future others will be able to enjoy the rights and privileges most of us take utterly for granted. That's how things improve.

AlannaPartridge · 19/09/2013 18:56

But how can people freely specify other things eg "no smokers" "no kids" "no pets" etc

It's all to do with the Equality Act - and certain groups fit into "protected characteristics" - pregnant women, gays & lesbians, different races, transsexuals. Smokers & kids aren't protected in this way just because they are smokers or kids.

SoupDragon · 19/09/2013 18:58

They did say the couple could have separate rooms.
They also make the wife's brother sleep separately from hs female partner.

MrsTerryPratchett · 19/09/2013 19:00

FlapJack it was mentioned upthread. Do you think people are OK to put signs up saying, "no Blacks, no Irish""? Because they used to and were challenged by those uppity minorities and now you don't see those signs any more.

Just because these people's bigotry is supplied by their religion, doesn't make it any more right.

GobbySadcase · 19/09/2013 19:01

Offering them separate rooms is not a get out clause FROM THE LAW.

SoupDragon · 19/09/2013 19:02

So, is it illegal to insist heterosexual couples have separate rooms if they are not married?

SoupDragon · 19/09/2013 19:04

I am simply pointing out that they didn't say "no gays" and that they apply their beliefs on marriage equally to heterosexual and homosexual relationships.

I'm not saying that they were right.

needasilverlining · 19/09/2013 19:05

I don't think marriage is a protected characteristic so I suppose not, which seems stupid. But that's no excuse IMO.

Am wondering why dignity is being used to mean 'take the shit treatment being meted out and shuffle off quietly'. I think challenging such behaviour via the law is very dignified.

Original poster

lagertops · 19/09/2013 19:07

They did say the couple could have separate rooms.
They also make the wife's brother sleep separately from hs female partner.

But why should they sleep in separate rooms? As for the wife's brother and his wife, if they were married they could share a room, however no matter what the gay couple do they wouldn't be allowed one. Like the website says, 'Married heterosexual couples only.' What business is it really of the B&B owners what people do in the rooms? If someone is going to be inconsiderate and leave the place in a tip or leave a used condom under the pillow, then that says more about them as people than their sexuality or lifestyle choices. I really don't see how two men kipping next to each other affects them.

OP posts:

namechangesforthehardstuff · 19/09/2013 19:08

Am wondering why dignity is being used to mean 'take the shit treatment being meted out and shuffle off quietly'. I think challenging such behaviour via the law is very dignified.

Yes that's what I meant to say

McNewPants2013 · 19/09/2013 19:10

As i said up thread, How do they prove a couple is married.

Pachacuti · 19/09/2013 19:18

FlapJackFlossie, for legal purposes a civil partnership is equivalent to marriage. If they allow married couples to share a room then they have to allow couples in a civil partnership to share a room or it's unlawful discrimination. The fact that they made it QUITE CLEAR that they were engaging in unlawful discrimination on their website doesn't actually make that any better.

In their private lives they are fully entitled to discriminate against anyone they like. They can refuse to let the wife's brother share a room with his girlfriend. They can refuse to have gay visitors sharing a room. Heck, if they want they can refuse to let black people come to stay with them, or demand that visitors join in household prayers, or whatever they want. But if they are running a business then they aren't entitled to do that. That's how the law works. And if they aren't prepared to abide by the law then they shouldn't be in business.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5