Christians arrested for defending their beliefs

Originally Posted by Flyboy

The point is that this couple clearly had a problem with this woman's choice of religious dress, otherwise why say that it represented a form of bondage. From what I remember, that has not been challeneged, only the way it was said.

And for that, do you believe the loss of their livelihood is natural justice?

Originally Posted by Chris

And for that, do you believe the loss of their livelihood is natural justice?

I don't - but I reiterate one of the first rules of customer service - don't get into arguments with paying customers.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

The article says that one of their main sources of income was from the NHS, who have since stopped sending patients following Mrs Tazi's complaints. Unless the NHS was its ONLY source of income then I'd think there were other reasons for the hotel not making money anymore, the Recession, as well as competition being two of them. It would be interesting to see their accounts leading up to the complaint.

Also as Forevever said, don't get into arguments with paying customers. Irregardless of whether she had gone to court or not, she could have just completed feedback to the hospital of her experience and they might have taken the same decison into not using the hospital anymore.

[Russ]

They haven't said they're not making money anymore, just that their income has dropped. As this thread has shown some people will take a knee-jerk reaction to the headline that a Muslim was verbally attacked so it's possible these types of people are voiding the hotel too.

None of us know exactly what happened that day but the person with the best viewpoint (the judge) indicated there was more than what we're told.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Their main income stream has been effected because the hospital that sent through a lot of their clients is not doing so anymore. They are not doing so, not because Mrs Tazi was a muslim in my opinion, but because the hotel owners got into an argument with a guest, who happened to be a patient in the hospital's care. They (the hospital)would have probably taken the same action whatever the basis of the argument was.

I don't think the lack of income is due to customers no longer going there because of a knee jerk reaction.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Their main income stream has been effected because the hospital that sent through a lot of their clients is not doing so anymore. They are not doing so, not because Mrs Tazi was a muslim in my opinion, but because the hotel owners got into an argument with a guest, who happened to be a patient in the hospital's care. They (the hospital)would have probably taken the same action whatever the basis of the argument was.

I still think there's an element of political correctness in this. Regardless of the woman's faith, I agree with you that the hospital saw it as the hoteliers arguing with a patient and given how quickly people like to make claims against the NHS ("they insisted in putting me in a hotel where I'd be verbally attacked"), I'm sure the health bosses took that decision to avoid any potential complications.

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I don't - but I reiterate one of the first rules of customer service - don't get into arguments with paying customers.

Especially about politics and/or religion. It's only common sense.

[nomadking]

She had been there for weeks not days and may have spent a large part of each day at the house. There had been previous discussions involving the three of them over that period of time. It wasn't as if it was the first time they had met. It wasn't a one-sided rant, it was a two-way discussion on issues.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Chris

And for that, do you believe the loss of their livelihood is natural justice?

I thought it was their choice to close up. As has already been suggested, if they can't contain their religious exuberance and applying their enthusiasm to paying customers, perhaps they should consider a alternate venture.

[Russ]

"Religious exuberance" or responding to an attack on their faith?

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I thought it was their choice to close up. As has already been suggested, if they can't contain their religious exuberance and applying their enthusiasm to paying customers, perhaps they should consider a alternate venture.

Nice dodge. Let's try again.

The couple are citing the allegations - which a court has ruled do not constitute criminality, and are so far from criminality that they should never have resulted in a charge - as the reason for the failure of their business.

As it seems to me that you deem their behaviour to be unacceptable, if not actually criminal, I am interested to know whether you also think that the failure of their business is a naturally just outcome?

[Flyboy]

I wouldn't want to do business with them if I thought that I would end up having an argument with them and I presume that is the belief of many others.

I read that as meaning "Yes, it serves them right, but I don't want to say so directly because it makes me look a bit small-minded and vindictive towards people whose beliefs and values I don't share".

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Chris

I read that as meaning "Yes, it serves them right, but I don't want to say so directly because it makes me look a bit small-minded and vindictive towards people whose beliefs and values I don't share".

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Chris

I read that as meaning "Yes, it serves them right, but I don't want to say so directly because it makes me look a bit small-minded and vindictive towards people whose beliefs and values I don't share".

that sounds like your describing a bigot