To think this couple's attitude has no place in modern society?

[Georama]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10419543/Christian-couple-ban-gay-man-partner-buying-dream-650-000-sexuality.html

A church-going wife who banned a gay man and his ITV producer partner from buying her £650,000 Surrey home has hit back in the row and insisted they are just sticking to their beliefs.

Luke Whitehouse and Lachlan Mantell were stunned when they were told that they could not buy the three-bedroom home because the Christian owners didn't want to sell to 'two men in a partnership.'

Honestly, they should be ashamed of that text. I hope no estate agent will work with them ever again.

Given that the poster in question is called fuckyourpronouns

Exactly lol, didn't pass me by, hence my post they just won't or can't see it.
Depending on what the flavour of bigotry is.

[quote Innocenta]@SantaClawsServiette I'm not trying to restrict anyone's thinking. Stop strawmanning. [/quote]
Really, what's the point of putting them in a newspaper otherwise.

People can think what they want, and they can choose to sell their private property to whomever they want as well. They are not a business, and people can dispose of their private property as they see fit. That's what makes it private.

There are so many people in the world that think we, that is each one of us, are wrong and living in a wrong way, in some sense. Sometimes we encounter them.

@Innocenta

Some people don't seem to understand that being homophobic isn't a neutral position. It's not like preferring apples to oranges. If you think it's okay to behave like the couple in question, then yes, actually, you are condoning not different private beliefs (abhorrent ones, but sure - freedom of ideas), but hatred. Good old fashioned hatred.

So don't dress it up in the language of pluralism and respect, and call gay people stupid and childish for challenging you. We know exactly what you're saying, we see right through it, and we'll continue to call it out.

No one is saying it is a neutral position. If you think that, you are really not understanding what they are saying. I don't think you actually know what pluralism means either. It's not easy, it's not about just having people with nice ideas about irrelevant things that you can feel good about. Pluralism is a very taxing cultural/social choice.

@CousinKrispy

Funny how certain Christians cherry-pick bits out of the Bible to take seriously.

Discriminating against people for their sexual orientation (which, happily, is a protected characteristic in the UK).... that's justified because the Bible says to do it.

Putting witches to death, not wearing blended fabrics, following the dietary laws, killing the enemies of God, etc etc also from the Bible....funny but that isn't given equal importance.

I'm glad anyway that this couple didn't give their money to the homeowners, and I hope the latter can't find a buyer. Pah.

I'm sorry, but this kind of comment just really is a very ignorant kind of thing that gets repeated a lot. There are rules, for want of a better word, for how Christians understand the Bible, and understand the different parts - not all branches of Christianity see this the same way and it's one of the main reasons many of these groups are separate in the first place. But it's essentially a collection of different books and not all have the same role or are the same genre. Nor is the Bible the only element at play in the development of Christian theology. This is really basic stuff to understand how Christianity works, it's not esoteric.

I always find it odd that people say this kind of thing when they clearly have very little knowledge of how any Christian group sees the Bible, but to date I've never ever seen anyone say this to Jewish groups, and not even in such a direct way to Muslims. Their ways of understanding scriptures and other important texts are similarly varied and complicated, but somehow people tend to assume that there is a logic there that in most cases Jews and Muslims understand more than outsiders will, and that there is in fact some kind of reasoning behind it. There seems to be an unspoken assumption that Jewish people are smart and so must know what they are talking about and Christians are just too dim to notice they aren't following all the rules.

You know for much of Christian history belief in witches - or in people who could do magic, in any cases - was considered heretical? And as for dietary laws - the answer to why that changes is actually found in the Bible, so it's not even a complicated historical issue.

There are lots of disagreements among Christians about how to understand the Bible but this kind of criticism of not following each rule is just very simplistic.

At the end of the day people are entitled to their beliefs even if we don’t agree with them. Some religions have beliefs that I strongly disagree with but still they have the right to hold those beliefs. I personally have beliefs that some people disagree with and the same applies.

Lol seriously. It’s just laughable there are people who still have issues with gays

@SantaClawsServiette Ah, I see you've decided to employ the tired old "you gay people are stupid and don't understand!" trope, as so many others in the thread have done.

It's not impressive, you know, and we see right through it. All your patronising comments and sidetracks into "explaining" things (which no one needs) are just froth, intended to distract from your own bigotry.

Religious belief is not an excuse for discrimination,
Full stop.
It’s just isn’t.

@Isaw3ships completely agree with you there.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/christian-couple-gay-house-bible-b1997952.html

It’s clearly not a non- story as some in here claim if every major U.K. paper incl The TImes, Independent, Telegraph, tabloids et all are running it.

Not seeing many articles defending the bigots not mentioning the fact it’s discrimination against Christians that we should all be really focusing on…

They can sell their house to whoever they want to. Yes, their views are a little backwards for me, but they've done nothing wrong so I don't know why everyone is jumping on them. They weren't rude, and they've explained why they don't want to sell to this couple. Each to their own.

@stingofthebutterfly

They can sell their house to whoever they want to. Yes, their views are a little backwards for me, but they've done nothing wrong so I don't know why everyone is jumping on them. They weren't rude, and they've explained why they don't want to sell to this couple. Each to their own.

Legally, they’ve done nothing wrong.

Morally, lots of people think they absolutely have. They have committed an evil act of blatant, deliberate homophobic bigotry. And that’s what people are jumping on

Also they were incredibly rude. Just because the message may have been written to sound civil doesn’t change the fact they told someone they wouldn’t sell them a house because of who they were and then quoted scripture that, at least in the context it was sent, is massively insulting. The fact they didn’t use some modern slur doesn’t make that polite

That's no a Christian attitude at all. Plain nasty.

@stingofthebutterfly

They can sell their house to whoever they want to. Yes, their views are a little backwards for me, but they've done nothing wrong so I don't know why everyone is jumping on them. They weren't rude, and they've explained why they don't want to sell to this couple. Each to their own.

Sending them bible verses about gay people having depraved minds and suffering in eternal fire isn't rude?

‘ Freedom of speech isn't only for people who say nice things.’

Indeed. Which is why a newspaper gets to publish this story and publicise them without repercussions a d I get to say I think they are outdated,homophobic bigots.
Freedom of speech doesn’t, of course , cover hate crime but their backward opinions in their case doesn’t constitute hate speech.

@stingofthebutterfly

They can sell their house to whoever they want to. Yes, their views are a little backwards for me, but they've done nothing wrong so I don't know why everyone is jumping on them. They weren't rude, and they've explained why they don't want to sell to this couple. Each to their own.

@stingofthebutterfly Yes, they have done something wrong. They have behaved homophobically. If you seriously think that's not wrong, then you're part of the problem too.

@Isaw3ships

‘ Freedom of speech isn't only for people who say nice things.’

Indeed. Which is why a newspaper gets to publish this story and publicise them without repercussions a d I get to say I think they are outdated,homophobic bigots.
Freedom of speech doesn’t, of course , cover hate crime but their backward opinions in their case doesn’t constitute hate speech.

yep. i agree. I have just done a course on freedom of speech including of course restrictions for hate crimes.

So this fits into that. Legally nothing wrong with it (morally probably but they were at least truthful and said what they thought which they probably think its better than just lying about a change of mind over the sale which most people would do)

I may choose not to sell my house to someone's who views i disagree with but i'd not get castigated in the daily mail as my views are probably "the right ones" per the daily mail.

Again, people are not saying that they agree with this couple's opinions, just that they are within their rights to think as they wish. People are also commenting on the OP's post which says that this attitude has no right in modern society, when all modern society is, is the attitude of all people alive at the present moment.
I feel that because people feel strongly about this issue they do not wish to hear an apposing view in any way, and when they hear of one being expressed, wish to suppress this view more harshly than the law would permit. If we wish to live in a tolerant society, we have to accept that other people have differing opinions. We have ways of making sure that people are not discriminated against by t he state, because the state should represent the majority view, but we can't force individuals to privately not discriminate, even if it hurts to hear these views when they touch us as individuals. Personally I was upset to hear a friend wouldn't consider viewing a house next to a disabled living community home. It changed my opinion of her, but I wouldn't say she should be forced to view that house because by not doing so she would be discriminating!

@wishtotravel No, it is not acceptable to behave in a hateful and discriminatory way. Stop excusing homophobia. You may give lip service to not really agreeing, but you're still ultimately justifying those views.

Nobody is saying people can't have their own private opinions. But this goes beyond that - they didn't have to behave in the way that they did, which plainly crossed over from a mere belief into active, hateful discrimination. At minimum it's a hate incident, even if not meeting the threshold for the CPS to pursue prosecution.

Morally they’re a couple of shits. But other than being in the papers for being a couple of shits this will soon blow over and there’ll be little or no repercussions for them.
Other than some of their colleagues, particularly hers at a university I would imagine, thinking that they’re bigots of the lowest order.

Again, people are not saying that they agree with this couple's opinions

@WindInTheWillows7 seems to be.

[quote fuckyourpronouns]@BashStreetKid
" Oh, I know, they have a terrible time, don't they? What with the Queen being the head of the Church of England, compulsory Christian worship in schools, church schools funded by the state, the state broadcaster regularly broadcasting Christian services and hymns - the persecution is absolutely horrendous."

Wtf are you on about?! [/quote]
WTF is your problem with understanding that, @fuckyourpronouns? Have you come across sarcasm before?

@Alayalaya

At the end of the day people are entitled to their beliefs even if we don’t agree with them. Some religions have beliefs that I strongly disagree with but still they have the right to hold those beliefs. I personally have beliefs that some people disagree with and the same applies.

The issue here is how they express those beliefs. If they do so in a way that discriminates against groups with protected characteristics, they are breaking the law.