Gay couple claim they were ejected from pub for kissing

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Again, Section 5 of the Public Order Act "Harassment, alarm or distress" makes no mention of "intent".

Additionally it is not a defence for a defendant to "state" that he or she had "no reason to believe that someone is likely to be caused harassment,alarm or distress" the defence requires the defendant to prove that to be the case.

"(3)It is a defence for the accused to prove"

As such the opinion of the defendant as to whether his / her statements were insulting or causing distress - whether directed at an individual or not - is irrelevant.

You do realise that your interpretation of that piece of legislation has effectively outlawed all free speech and opinions

thank the lord you're not a judge

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by martyh

You do realise that your interpretation of that piece of legislation has effectively outlawed all free speech and opinions

thank the lord you're not a judge

It's not actually an interpretation on my part Marty.

I quoted a particular part of the legislation verbatim - you are the one who was seeking to interpret it.

[AdamD]

Regarding the subject at hand, personally, I have no problem if people show affection in public, regardless of gender

But, I do think there's a point at which it becomes TO much.

Holding hands, an occasional kiss on the lips/cheek is fine, but when you cross that line by engaging in full on groping and extended kissing, it should be done in a more private area/place.

Not sure why some people find two men or women kissing as disgusting, or obscene, perhaps they were born closed minded or were raised that way.

My dad is one of those people, but fortunatly, I am not.

[Welshchris]

Originally Posted by AdamD

Regarding the subject at hand, personally, I have no problem if people show affection in public, regardless of gender

But, I do think there's a point at which it becomes TO much.

Holding hands, an occasional kiss on the lips/cheek is fine, but when you cross that line by engaging in full on groping and extended kissing, it should be done in a more private area/place.

Not sure why some people find two men or women kissing as disgusting, or obscene, perhaps they were born closed minded or were raised that way.

My dad is one of those people, but fortunatly, I am not.

there were a str8 couple ejected from the train station here a few days ago after complaints to staff. What Started in just a kiss or two led to her putting her hands down the front of his tracksuit bottoms and he was showing a certain state of arousal.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Karrington

That's makes no sense. Racist talk is racism and homophobic talk is homophobia..

Do you only consider something homophobia when people are violently attacked?

If I were to say black people made me feel sick that would make me a racist..

If someone says gay people make them feel sick they are homophobic.

You've missed my point...

My point was that expressing disgust at something is not homophobia. Homophobia may be the reason for the disgust, but disgust is not homophobia.


There seem to be conflicting reports regarding what the couple were doing. They say it was a peck on the cheek. Others say it was more. If it was more, then the landlord may well have done the same for a heterosexual couple. Would you consider that Heterophobic?

Also, if they were leaving anyway, why are they bothered? Did he bar them? Even if he did, it's not as if Soho is short of pubs, gay or straight.

There are people who have posted on this thread that I would consider homophobic, but that is based more on the fact that they seem to leap on any thread that includes any reference to homosexuality. There is also one I would also consider racist. *If* they (or anyone) do anything which the admin team feels contradicts either the law or the forum's Ts&Cs, we will act.

But, beyond that, we are not here to censor people wish to say. We are not the thought police.

[Kymmy]

It's all context and personal viewpoint. What some people don't realise is that the law (or even forum rules) might not agree with their person opinion as to what is racist or homophobic and it's the law (rules) that wins every time.

If we go back to the original story then if the landlord ejected them because it was two men kissing then it is homophobic and discrimination, if he ejected them because it was a couple kissing then it was just him being a prude. He might not see that there is a difference but the law does.

Originally Posted by Kymmy

It's all context and personal viewpoint. What some people don't realise is that the law (or even forum rules) might not agree with their person opinion as to what is racist or homophobic and it's the law (rules) that wins every time.

If we go back to the original story then if the landlord ejected them because it was two men kissing then it is homophobic and discrimination, if he ejected them because it was a couple kissing then it was just him being a prude. He might not see that there is a difference but the law does.

There is also sometimes a difference between law and justice

For example if a gay couple were going at it hammer and tongues literally and were asked to leave and then cry discrimination and win the case the law hmay have been followed but justice has not been done

[Kymmy]

Not really as in that case the reason for asking someone to leave would be possible lewd behaviour

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Why not? It's a prosecutable offence.

When the person on the receiving end of it deems it to be distressful, abusive or insulting to them.

I was thinking about this earlier actually, and it just strikes me as a stupidly wide-cast law if indeed there is no provision for reasonableness in that law. It means people can be arrested and convicted for saying 'hello' to their neighbours if the neighbours take offence. In the case in question, the police could round up the kissing couple, the landlord, and anyone else that commented either verbally or gesturally.

[Welshchris]

Originally Posted by danielf

I was thinking about this earlier actually, and it just strikes me as a stupidly wide-cast law if indeed there is no provision for reasonableness in that law. It means people can be arrested and convicted for saying 'hello' to their neighbours if the neighbours take offence. In the case in question, the police could round up the kissing couple, the landlord, and anyone else that commented either verbally or gesturally.

heres one for u :-x

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26877682...ws-weird_news/

[Pedro1]

Originally Posted by Mr_love_monkey

That kind of thing makes me sick - I hate it when I'm in the pub enjoying a quiet pint, and in come 2 male buffalos kissing each other.

With you on this.... I too think it is MANKY.....

---------- Post added at 04:46 ---------- Previous post was at 04:35 ----------

Originally Posted by Welshchris

heres one for u :-x

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26877682...ws-weird_news/

Lol lol....

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Karrington

I can see this discussion is pointless. I was hoping to change your opinion, I obviously failed..

With respect, what gives you the right to decide that someone's opinion needs changing?

Perhaps some feel yours needs changing? Or is that 'different'?

Going back to the original subject, not wishing to intentionally sound flippant but isn't there a straightforward way for the bar manager to make this right?

Just ask some straight couples who are kissing to leave then he won't end up being labelled 'homophobic' or "gayist" or whatever people are calling him.

I remember a case a few years ago where a group of Asian lads beat up and almost killed this white bloke, with witnesses saying the gang were shouting stuff like "Don't mess with Paki business" as they were sticking the boot in to him. But because the same gang went on that night to beat up some other Asians the judge in their assault trial said he couldn't be sure it was a racist attack so they were only prosecuted for ABH.

[Ignitionnet]

It's quite depressing when one can be put in jail for hurting someone's feelings.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

It's quite depressing when one can be put in jail for hurting someone's feelings.

It would be if it were true. I think the reality of what nutters like the EDL, BNP and MAC routinely get away with on our streets reinforces my view that the courts allow the defence of 'reasonable' comment to be interpreted quite broadly.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

It's quite depressing when one can be put in jail for hurting someone's feelings.

If prosecuted and found guilty of such an offence then it is only punishable by a level 3 fine of £1000 max