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.

Legally, they’ve done nothing wrong

I think they have.

Section 33 Equality Act 2010:

(1) A person (A) who has the right to dispose of premises must not discriminate against another (B)—
(a). as to the terms on which A offers to dispose of the premises to B;
(b). by not disposing of the premises to B
(c) in A's treatment of B with respect to things done in relation to persons seeking premises.

I see upthread that it's been suggested that this doesn't apply, but the person who says so has never come back to explain it, and there's nothing in the section suggesting that there are any limitations to how it's applied.

[quote Innocenta]@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. [/quote]
I agree that these views and behaviour were hurtful and hateful but I was simply replying to the idea that they shouldn't belong in modern society. Modern society is simply a reflection of everyone's views, there is no should or shouldn't about it. All we can do is say whether or not we agree with a view, and until the law, on the behalf of the people, makes various actions illegal, then those actions are made according to one's own moral compass.
If the OP had said, should it be illegal to do this, or how hateful it was, then that is a different discussion.
My other point was that everyone discriminates in their private lives because we all make decisions based on our own views. My point was that we can't presume that all views different to our own are wrong and therefore need silencing immediately.

@wishtotravel Why are you so eager to speak up for the homophobes?

No one is saying that varied views are inherently wrong. We are talking about this example, which is an instance of homophobia.

@Artichokeleaves

Well obviously they do have a place in modern society, they're living in it and it's ridiculous to pretend that society doesn't include people with these beliefs. It does. Those beliefs don't get changed by tutting and reporting to the police for wrong think, that just makes the divide of belief harder and them angrier. Having beliefs you may not agree with is not a crime.

If you discover that your seller is prejudiced and has incompatible views and doesn't want to sell to you - you shrug and go buy from someone else, because life is too short. You might think your seller is an unpleasant twit: that's not against the law. This whole punish and silence the wrongthinkers and be prejudiced against them really doesn't help anyone or solve anything. It's just prejudice in a different form.

I'm LGBT btw.

You’re absolutely right. We should allow people to marginalise people with protected characteristics 🤔

You’re attitude is hardly pro lgbt. Backwards people with these attitudes should be called out every single time. By doing nothing, shrugging and walking away, we condone them.

@Byebyeboris Very well said.

@WindInTheWillows7

Homosexuality between men was only decriminalised in the sixties - the eighties in Scotland and NI. It was only in 2001 that gay people could serve in the military and the age of consent was equalised, and section 28 was in force until less than 20 years ago (although judging from your posts you probably think it should still be there). Same-sex marriage has only been legal throughout the UK for two years.

When was the last time that Christianity was illegal, and that Christians were legally prevented from getting married, having children or serving in the armed forces? I seem to forget.

[quote Innocenta]@wishtotravel Why are you so eager to speak up for the homophobes?

No one is saying that varied views are inherently wrong. We are talking about this example, which is an instance of homophobia. [/quote]
I am not defending anyone. You have made the focus of your discussion homosexuality, which is fine. I have made my focus whether or not modern society includes unpopular views, and in my opinion it does, independently to whether or not I agree with them.

@wishtotravel The focus of the thread is homophobia. Like it or not, that's what you're defending.

I hope you're more honest with yourself than you are in what you say on the internet.

I wish there was some kind of karma that would kick in re: seeing the house but the fact is the publicity has probably helped

If the house still on the market, which is doubtful, I suspect they may well get lots of people viewing the house out of sheer curiosity. I must say, it's quite tempting to go round with a female friend wearing stereotype butch lesbian gear.

@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.

I'm not entirely sure that they are. Some men believe they are entitled to sex with women, through force if necessary. Some people feel that women who have sex outside of marriage should be stoned to death. Some people believe that children are capable of consenting to and enjoying sex with adults. A civilised society doesn't just shrug its shoulders and say these people are entitled to their beliefs. A civilised society challenges and educates, and if that fails, it monitors and controls, to protect people who would otherwise be harmed. The reality is, people with very strong beliefs don't typically keep them in the privacy of their own minds. They share them, seek out like minded people to confirm and perpetuate them, and eventually often act upon them, as this couple has done.

I'm not entirely sure that they are. Some men believe they are entitled to sex with women, through force if necessary. Some people feel that women who have sex outside of marriage should be stoned to death. Some people believe that children are capable of consenting to and enjoying sex with adults. A civilised society doesn't just shrug its shoulders and say these people are entitled to their beliefs. A civilised society challenges and educates, and if that fails, it monitors and controls, to protect people who would otherwise be harmed. The reality is, people with very strong beliefs don't typically keep them in the privacy of their own minds. They share them, seek out like minded people to confirm and perpetuate them, and eventually often act upon them, as this couple has done.

Quite. And some people think that gay people shouldn't be allowed to own a home.

Which is why we need to keep shouting and protesting about these fucking bigoted cunts.

@thedancingbear I couldn't agree with you more. 👏🏻

A civilised society has laws against the above list of behaviours.

@WindInTheWillows7

Just look at some of the ways Christians are described on this thread. I even saw one comment despairing that this couple might breed, and pass their beliefs onto their children. Sure, people are free to be Christians in the UK without harassment or discrimination, as long as they don't actually live out their faith in society or express their beliefs in the workplace or in public. christianconcern.com/cccases/the-bristol-four/ christianconcern.com/cccases/seyi-omooba/ christianconcern.com/cccases/andrew-sathiyavan/ christianconcern.com/cccases/hatun-tash/ christianconcern.com/cccases/hazel-lewis/

As long as you're one of those nice Christians that doesn't actually take the Bible seriously, or talk about your faith, you're perfectly safe.

That website promotes conversion therapy. It's sick.

Everyone is protesting about this, yet the Catholic Church is homophobic on a daily basis and nobody says a word. These people wouldn’t have that attitude if the church hadn’t taught it to them.

@Alayalaya

Everyone is protesting about this, yet the Catholic Church is homophobic on a daily basis and nobody says a word. These people wouldn’t have that attitude if the church hadn’t taught it to them.

Not sure where you got the impression that nobody ever talks about the Catholic church's attitude to homosexuality.

Absolutely nuts.

The official line RC is no abortion, contraception, and other things that are a hard no for me.

Just googled as couldn't remember and had feeling which was correct. They mixed on homosexuality. Conflicting views. Current pope saying welcome to god's family and stuff.

AND here, on the ground. In my area at least which has loads RC people, they RC by background. Cultural Catholicism.

I know loads women who at school with RC. I went to RC convent school myself primary.

Zero issues gay people. Yes Contraception. Abortion mixed but women I know when young have had, and see as personal. I think couple of friends wouldn't ever have. But it's not come up. No judgement of others. I also know a few gay RC men.

The vv devout RC I know are all converts. Clearly much fewer number than by background.

Massive issues from RC other countries.
Sorry didn't mention NI. obv part UK different religious situation obv.

However abortion now legal there. (Access issues yes but legal).

And also legal Ireland now.

Essentially. If you're worried about RC impact on people's lives. Start elsewhere in the world infinitely higher priority.

@Alayalaya

Everyone is protesting about this, yet the Catholic Church is homophobic on a daily basis and nobody says a word. These people wouldn’t have that attitude if the church hadn’t taught it to them.

So given that, and your post.

WHERE?

Which RC countries are actively homophobic impacting daily lives.

And at no homophobia if no RC. That's startlingly simplistic. You've noticed that coincidentally other big religions in more fundamental forms also aren't terribly keen on homosexual people. Well mainly men seems to be the focus. Also share misogyny, strict sex roles etc etc etc

They both wrote to the Houses of Common regarding teaching children about different relation ships. He write the following
'I am a single 30-year-old, who has 13 siblings, and I am very concerned that they and others, are not taught things which will be harmful to them, and society at large. Secular, liberal views which seem to dominate society today, to the complete exclusion of God and His Word, the Holy Bible, are damaging to us and our posterity. Therefore I am saddened that the State should want to indoctrinate children with ideas of relationships which should never be mentioned or countenanced, let alone taught and encouraged. And then to imply that the parents would have no right to withdraw their children from these lessons is bordering on draconian.

'I would be glad if you would kindly consider my proposal, which would be to diligently compare proposed teaching content with the Holy Bible, on which our very Constitution is based, and then please consider that it violates the rights of parents in the upbringing of their children, to enforce teaching on those children which is not only unnecessary, but dangerous and harmful.

'I hope you will be given help and wisdom from God to discuss this matter, and bring it to an issue which is pleasing in His sight, before Whom we will all give an account of our deeds after we die: Romans 14:12'Dr Brunker wrote: 'I am very concerned about the above law that is proposed.

In particular, I am extremely uncomfortable about forcing children aged 4 to 11 to learn about non-traditional families, relationships and sexual identities. This overrides the rights of parents to bring up their children within certain belief systems. At the very least parents should have the right to exclude their children from this Relationships Education.

'Please vote against this Statutory Instrument to save our children from being stolen from their parents and sold to state-decreed way of thinking. Variety of opinions and beliefs is what makes us a diverse and healthy society, and we cannot afford to stifle freedom of thought and belief.

I would be very grateful if you could carefully consider my concerns. '

Personally I am more afraid for our children of the religious indoctrination these people preach, rather than who they may fall in love with!!
And she may be' intelligent (PhD) ' in her field of work but I'm not sure I'd want her views linked to my institute. currently listed as working at Cambridge University's Synthetic Biology Interdisciplinary Research Centre.

Interesting.

I don't know their beliefs but would guess eg-

• No sex outside marriage. Meaning they wouldn't sell to a couple who weren't married man woman? Would it have to be Christian marriage? Dunno.

I assume then they are refusing to sell to, or buy from-

• Any same sex couple
• Man woman not married
• Man woman in civil partnership
• Man woman with registrar
• Married in different religion not church?
• Never married single parent
• More? Dunno if the above right or not.

Gist though.

Surely must be checking all want to view out. And any house might buy.

• How do they check if had sex before marriage? That's a sin right?

Um. That leaves like not huge amount of people left to sell to or buy from

OR.
Are they more interested in some sins than others?
That would be very wrong, though.

Dunno their beliefs but I do wonder if so firm on all their beliefs around right wrong sin...

@safclass

They both wrote to the Houses of Common regarding teaching children about different relation ships. He write the following 'I am a single 30-year-old, who has 13 siblings, and I am very concerned that they and others, are not taught things which will be harmful to them, and society at large. Secular, liberal views which seem to dominate society today, to the complete exclusion of God and His Word, the Holy Bible, are damaging to us and our posterity. Therefore I am saddened that the State should want to indoctrinate children with ideas of relationships which should never be mentioned or countenanced, let alone taught and encouraged. And then to imply that the parents would have no right to withdraw their children from these lessons is bordering on draconian.

'I would be glad if you would kindly consider my proposal, which would be to diligently compare proposed teaching content with the Holy Bible, on which our very Constitution is based, and then please consider that it violates the rights of parents in the upbringing of their children, to enforce teaching on those children which is not only unnecessary, but dangerous and harmful.

'I hope you will be given help and wisdom from God to discuss this matter, and bring it to an issue which is pleasing in His sight, before Whom we will all give an account of our deeds after we die: Romans 14:12'Dr Brunker wrote: 'I am very concerned about the above law that is proposed.

In particular, I am extremely uncomfortable about forcing children aged 4 to 11 to learn about non-traditional families, relationships and sexual identities. This overrides the rights of parents to bring up their children within certain belief systems. At the very least parents should have the right to exclude their children from this Relationships Education.

'Please vote against this Statutory Instrument to save our children from being stolen from their parents and sold to state-decreed way of thinking. Variety of opinions and beliefs is what makes us a diverse and healthy society, and we cannot afford to stifle freedom of thought and belief.

I would be very grateful if you could carefully consider my concerns. '

Personally I am more afraid for our children of the religious indoctrination these people preach, rather than who they may fall in love with!!
And she may be' intelligent (PhD) ' in her field of work but I'm not sure I'd want her views linked to my institute. currently listed as working at Cambridge University's Synthetic Biology Interdisciplinary Research Centre.

Yeah, they don't exactly make an effort to hide their homophobia. God help their kids if they ever have them.

@thedancingbear

I'm not entirely sure that they are. Some men believe they are entitled to sex with women, through force if necessary. Some people feel that women who have sex outside of marriage should be stoned to death. Some people believe that children are capable of consenting to and enjoying sex with adults. A civilised society doesn't just shrug its shoulders and say these people are entitled to their beliefs. A civilised society challenges and educates, and if that fails, it monitors and controls, to protect people who would otherwise be harmed. The reality is, people with very strong beliefs don't typically keep them in the privacy of their own minds. They share them, seek out like minded people to confirm and perpetuate them, and eventually often act upon them, as this couple has done.

Quite. And some people think that gay people shouldn't be allowed to own a home.

Which is why we need to keep shouting and protesting about these fucking bigoted cunts.

There's irony in this, thedancingbear

You'd end up with a society where everyone stands in a circle shouting "fucking bigoted cunts" at each other. The comment you agreed with said that people with strong views may eventually act on them. Well that goes for people whose views are strong but currently accepted right as well as those whose views are strong butcurrently unacceptable wrong.

There has to be a way of living with people we disagree with, however distasteful we find them. Haranguing is not it. They could harangue you back, feeling perfectly justified. And polarisation just continues.

The line has to be actions, like here, not thoughts or words.