Judge Hale rethinks her condemnation of B&B owners who refuse a room to two gay men Watch

StrangeBanana
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
On her decision, six months ago, to condemn two Christian B&B owners who refused a double-room to a gay couple, Baroness Hale says she may have been wrong (Source).

Supreme Court deputy president Baroness Hale called for a rethink on religious and gay rights six months after she rejected the B&B owners’ arguments in a key test case.

...she acknowledged that the laws which ignore Christian consciences might not be "sustainable". Last week, in a highly unusual move, Lady Hale and her fellow judges ordered that the Bulls will not be liable for legal costs...

Lady Hale suggested that the law should develop a "conscience clause" for Christians like the Bulls.

...Colin Hart, from the Christian Institute, said: "The penny is beginning to drop among judges that the law is unfair. I hope the Supreme Court will find more room to protect Christian consciences."
So what do you guys think? Discrimination of any kind is clearly wrong, but since it is a private business, should the owners be allowed to refuse service to a specific group based on religious grounds? Is the law "unfair" on Christians, as Hart describes, and should there be a clause providing for the consciences of the religious?

I'm unsure as to whether we need a specific exemption clause for religious groups; Hale's changing her mind on this matter worries me, though. Rulings shouldn't hinge on the judge's opinions.
0
reply
Radicalathiest
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
Discrimination is wrong

If we allow discrimination on sexuality then why not allow all types of discrimination.

So sad that the moves we have made to make this country one of tolerance and acceptance are still being undermined by the faithful.
6
reply
Radicalathiest
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
(Original post by StrangeBanana)
My opinion: the judgement against them was wrong. It's their own business, and they can do what they like with it.




15
reply
StrangeBanana
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#4
(Original post by Radicalathiest)
x
Those are offensive because they are in plain sight. I still stand by what I've said. It's their business, and they can choose who to service as they please.
0
reply
Radicalathiest
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by StrangeBanana)
Those are offensive because they are in plain sight. I still stand by what I've said. It's their business, and they can choose who to service as they please.
So as long as it's done behind the scenes and not openly you would be OK with it

But come on, at least the the bigots be proud in their bigotry let them shout it from the roof tops with signs for us all to see (because at least that we we know we can avoid them and 'their' business)

But they can't refuse service as they please there are laws against that type of thing

The days of No Irish, No Blacks, No Dogs are (thankfully) long gone.
0
reply
Radicalathiest
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
So SB are you OK with this?

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/estate-agen...ate-bbc-513705
0
reply
StrangeBanana
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#7
(Original post by Radicalathiest)
So as long as it's done behind the scenes and not openly you would be OK with it

But come on, at least the the bigots be proud in their bigotry let them shout it from the roof tops with signs for us all to see (because at least that we we know we can avoid them and 'their' business)

But they can't refuse service as they please there are laws against that type of thing

The days of No Irish, No Blacks, No Dogs are (thankfully) long gone.
(Original post by Radicalathiest)
x
I'm not going to get into a drawn-out debate with you on this subject. I have said that discrimination of any kind is wrong; in an ideal world no-one would do it, but in these cases, where it can be difficult to ascertain the motives of the businesses, I feel that customers should simply find another provider of the service they're looking for.
0
reply
alapa
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
(Original post by StrangeBanana)
On her decision, six months ago, to condemn two Christian B&B owners who refused a double-room to a gay couple, Baroness Hale says she may have been wrong (Source).



So what do you guys think? Discrimination of any kind is clearly wrong, but since it is a private business, should the owners be allowed to refuse service to a specific group based on religious grounds? Is the law "unfair" on Christians, as Hart describes, and should there be a clause providing for the consciences of the religious?

My opinion: the judgement against them was wrong. It's their own business, and they can do what they like with it. I'm unsure as to whether we need a specific exemption clause for religious groups; Hale's changing her mind on this matter worries me, though. Rulings shouldn't hinge on the judge's opinions.
Many moons ago some Christians used the bible as an excuse for slavery, some Christians believed that black people were descended from Cain and therefore cursed. The KKK had roots in the Bible Belt. These reasons were used as an excuse to discriminate against black people.

Today we see the bible used to discriminate against gay people. It is true that the bible condemns homosexual acts, but it is far more vocal about divorce, lying, stealing and premarital sex. Unless the B+B owner wants to ban all divorcees I think they have no right to refuse the gay couple.
1
reply
StrangeBanana
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#9
(Original post by alapa)
Many moons ago some Christians used the bible as an excuse for slavery, some Christians believed that black people were descended from Cain and therefore cursed. The KKK had roots in the Bible Belt. These reasons were used as an excuse to discriminate against black people.

Today we see the bible used to discriminate against gay people. It is true that the bible condemns homosexual acts, but it is far more vocal about divorce, lying, stealing and premarital sex. Unless the B+B owner wants to ban all divorcees I think they have no right to refuse the gay couple.
So they have to refuse service to all the groups that the Bible tells them to?
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
also if they want to be consistent the B&B owners should forbid unmarried sex and or male+female sex involving the mouth or anus.
1
reply
alapa
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by StrangeBanana)
So they have to refuse service to all the groups that the Bible tells them to?
If they don't want to be hypocritical bigots then YES. They should ban every group the bible sounds off against.

A more sensible idea would just to serve everyone and treat all people with due care and respect.

I reckon I know what jesus would do. He took a sinner into his house (a sinful tax collector) and treated him like an honoured guest even though he led a life of corruption.
1
reply
alapa
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by the bear)
also if they want to be consistent the B&B owners should forbid unmarried sex and or male+female sex involving the mouth or anus.
Yup. No one should be admitted if they are wearing clothes of mixed fabric either.
0
reply
Rlove95
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by alapa)
Many moons ago some Christians used the bible as an excuse for slavery, some Christians believed that black people were descended from Cain and therefore cursed. The KKK had roots in the Bible Belt. These reasons were used as an excuse to discriminate against black people.

Today we see the bible used to discriminate against gay people. It is true that the bible condemns homosexual acts, but it is far more vocal about divorce, lying, stealing and premarital sex. Unless the B+B owner wants to ban all divorcees I think they have no right to refuse the gay couple.
I actually agree with you which is a surprise since I'm a Christian. Specially the last part, the BB owners shouldn't discriminate against gay people unless they are going to discriminate against all people who commit actions the Bible condemns which is probably everyone. I understand why they might not be comfortable with it if they disagree with it, but I don't think that's justification for turning them away.
0
reply
alapa
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
(Original post by Rlove95)
I actually agree with you which is a surprise since I'm a Christian. Specially the last part, the BB owners shouldn't discriminate against gay people unless they are going to discriminate against all people who commit actions the Bible condemns which is probably everyone. I understand why they might not be comfortable with it if they disagree with it, but I don't think that's justification for turning them away.
Thank you. I am a Christian as well and jesus wouldn't of turned away a sinner.
2
reply
Rlove95
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by alapa)
Yup. No one should be admitted if they are wearing clothes of mixed fabric either.
That's all part of the Old Testament and Old Covenant between God and the Jewish people back then. It's no longer applicable today.
0
reply
alapa
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by Rlove95)
That's all part of the Old Testament and Old Covenant between God and the Jewish people back then. It's no longer applicable today.
I don't consider Pauls letters to the Romans (the only time homosexuality is mentioned in the NT) as part of the new covenant myself. So I still personally confine homosexulaity to the realms of Leviticus but each to their own.
0
reply
pjm600
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
I hope the B&B isn't open on sundays.

Better yet, their menu:

"Pork with Madeira & cream, with Duchesse potatoes and seasonal vegetables.

Oh dear, that's a little bit inconvenient isn't it.

"And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. You shall not eat any of their flesh, and you shall not touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you." Lev. 11:7
1
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
The whole thing about whether they're guilty of discriminating is by-the-by now, they've been judged guilty so there's no point continuing that debate.

This new judgment has nothing to do with the rights of private businesses, with discrimination, or anything else. In simplicity, it's a judge saying that people should be able to get away with committing crimes based on their chosen religion. That's a very troubling idea I think. This whole idea of a "conscience clause" would be ripe for abuse.
1
reply
mrfletch
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
If they turned away gay couples for any other reason than being Christian they'd be rightly scorned, and I don't see how this is different. Homophobia is still homophobia regardless of your excuse for it. If they were openly running it and advertising it as a 'Christian B&B' and ran it to the dot according to the bible then maybe you could say the gay couple booking the room were being a bit irresponsible to book there but as it is this is just a case of open homophobia. Even then if you have outdated views then you shouldn't be in that business anyway. And yes, you could say that forcing them to accept gays is discriminating against their Christian views but I'd value the social rights of people who didn't choose to be gay over those who did choose to be homophobes.
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
also the consumption of prawns and lobsters should not be permitted. that would include prawn flavored crisps.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Where do you need more help?

Which Uni should I go to? (127)
17.81%
How successful will I become if I take my planned subjects? (73)
10.24%
How happy will I be if I take this career? (123)
17.25%
How do I achieve my dream Uni placement? (103)
14.45%
What should I study to achieve my dream career? (70)
9.82%
How can I be the best version of myself? (217)
30.43%

Watched Threads

View All