Christian B&B owners lose appeal....

SEMANTICS!!! Back on topic NOW Richard or I shall terminate your account. I am sick to death of you causing problems on my forum and I am also sick of you baiting my moderators - you will stop this ridiculous behaviour immediately!!!

[Russ]

Such a shame that being committed to religious beliefs the way they did has cost them so much.

Originally Posted by Russ

Such a shame that being committed to religious beliefs the way they did has cost them so much.

Hard to justify being a Christian and prejudiced though.Apart from that, what they choose to practice and who they let into their own home is up to them ,but a place of business is subject to laws that trump personal or religious beliefs

[Russ]

Originally Posted by martyh

Hard to justify being a Christian and prejudiced though.Apart from that, what they choose to practice and who they let into their own home is up to them ,but a place of business is subject to laws that trump personal or religious beliefs

They were being prejudice against unmarried couples. It's the media (and gay rights pressure groups) that turned it in to something else.

They would have refused accommodation to an unmarried straight couple too but you don't hear anyone banging on about that. Doesn't make the same kind of impact in headlines.

Originally Posted by Russ

They were being prejudice against unmarried couples. It's the media (and gay rights pressure groups) that turned it in to something else.

They would have refused accommodation to an unmarried straight couple too but you don't hear anyone banging on about that. Doesn't make the same kind of impact in headlines.

even from a business standpoint they where daft.Society has changed a lot ,unmarried couples ,gay couples are the norm nowadays so if they can't allow their business to move with the times then they are bound to fail

[Russ]

Neither you or I can comment with any certainty as to whether their policy had affected their business before all this kicked off - I can only presume that it hadn't.

The point I'm making was this was jumped on by Tatchel-esque idiots as "another example of homophobia" as if they had a "No gays, everyone else welcome" policy.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Religious beliefs are no excuse to break the laws of this land. If they cannot accept that then they have no business running a guest house. I for one welcome their absence.

Countless believers in different places, right down through history, would disagree with you.

There are tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of Christians in China right now who are breaking the law by attending underground churches that are not sanctioned by the Communist party. They do this because they find the Chinese state's restrictions on the full expression of their faith to be intolerable. A similar situation existed in the Soviet Union.

Christians have been breaking the law for their faith for as long as there have been Christians, and the further our own society travels from its broadly Christian outlook, the more it will happen here too.

As it happens, I believe this couple's actions to have been wrongheaded, even if they were sincere. It is possible to welcome someone who you believe to be living in an immoral way, without condoning the way they live. Jesus did so frequently, always welcoming, never compromising. Nevertheless, I think our lawmakers have overstepped a mark, in that they have seen fit to over-rule a homeowner's own rules of conduct for their guests (guest houses very often are still private homes).

Perhaps if they had made it clear what their stance about unmarried couples was on all their business literature then maybe,just maybe the whole situation wouldn't have happened.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Perhaps if they had made it clear what their stance about unmarried couples was on all their business literature then maybe,just maybe the whole situation wouldn't have happened.

I agree. I can't help wondering how they would have enforced it though. And if they'd enforced it, would they only just be going out of business now? Easily fewer than half of the couples that we have staying with us are married, if we had a clause saying "married couples only please" we'd be out of business in one season. Maybe that's what's happened here - they have finally got what they said they wanted.

We have single sex parties often enough, even though we dont have any twin bed rooms, although that is usually because we're on a popular walking route, on a stretch where there is a shortage of accommodation and sometimes people leave it too late to arrange their accommodation, so they end up sharing a bed with their mates. But I honestly couldn't tell if any of those couples w gay or just friends. I can't honestly think of any reason why I would want to know, or any polite way of asking. As a Christian, I'm called to live, and to advocate, the life Jesus called us to live, but not to give third parties a moral check list before I'll have anything to do with them.

Originally Posted by Chris

I agree. I can't help wondering how they would have enforced it though.

Asking for marriage certificate..

Personally I think that eventually they were on a hiding to nothing to think they could stay in business with that attitude in the 21st century.1950s perhaps but not this side of 2000.

[Russ]

It could be that they may have advertised a lot in Christian-orientated magazines or something and word got around in such circles about them?

Originally Posted by Russ

It could be that they may have advertised a lot in Christian-orientated magazines or something and word got around in such circles about them?

Maybe but even so I can't imagine many Christians explicitly choosing a place that only allowed married couples. I suspect most wouldn't factor such a consideration into their choice of accommodation. Maybe they got some out of solidarity but otherwise it's not the smartest business to run.

Originally Posted by Russ

It could be that they may have advertised a lot in Christian-orientated magazines or something and word got around in such circles about them?

Trust me, there isn't enough of that sort of business around to fill all your rooms, all year. We experimented with an ad in a Christian holidays brochure this year, we got precisely two enquiries out of it, and zero bookings. We haven't renewed our advert for 2014, much to the disappointment of the publisher, who all but told me he thought it was my duty to support his brochure to prevent it folding.

I don't think there are enough Christians in this country who are minded only to go on holiday to places run by Christians. I suspect anybody who was inclined to do that, would probably be so picky that they would spend their holiday finding fault with their hosts and questioning the standard of their Christian living.

I just don't see how the couple in question here could have had a functioning "marrieds only" policy in their double rooms. There aren't enough married couples any more and there aren't enough Christians who will only book a Christian holiday. I can't help thinking that, accidentally or otherwise, the only times they ended up enforcing their policy, was when it was blatantly obvious the couple couldn't have been married, I.e. when presented with two men or two women.

[Russ]

Hmmmm, and I'm pretty sure that fact was not wasted on Stonewall and co.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Linky

They should have realised that they were on a loosing wicket and saved their money.

In comment by Stonewall:



Quite.

A true Christian that follows the Bible will never accept homosexuality. What I have never understood is why one set of beliefs and rights mean nothing when another set of beliefs and rights do. I wonder if the same result would have ensued if it was an Islamic ran hotel turning the couple away

BTW I am not saying I am a true Christian