Should tolerant people tolerate intolerence?

[Haggisman]

No it doesn't.

Does it say in the bible.

And Jesus said, "Don't give ye Hotel rooms to men who fancy men"?

I don't think so.

Where in the line you've quoted have I mentioned homosexuality?

The religion stops THEM from engaging in homosexuality, nothing about pushing that belief onto others.

1 Corinthians 5:11

"11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one."

 

[elmarko]

Well, then if the bigotry is so in-twined with there personal beliefs then they should not be running a business.

If they can't play by our rules - then perhaps they are in the wrong business.

 

[RDM]

Which (rightly or wrongly) isn't recognised by some Christians as being equivalent to marriage.

Surely the same would also be said of civil marriages and marriages done under other faiths/denominations?

On the other hand, forcing the religious business to give a double room to an unmarried couple prevents the religious business from following their religious beliefs.

A business doesn't have any beliefs. Which is the point, individuals can have human rights, businesses can't. The individuals are not stopped from holding whatever beliefs they like, they just can't start a business that discriminates due to sexuality, religion, race or gender.

 

[elmarko]

"11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one."

I'm also pretty certain I could find an opposing quote which goes directly against this point.

Also, it's not exactly a great defence - "I'm going to discriminate against you because my religion is homophobic at the core".

Regardless of it being in the religion or not, this isn't a religious country so it's pretty much meaningless anyway.

 

[Castiel]

1 Corinthians 5:11

"11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one."

Paul's letter to the Corinthians is refering to male prostitution, pederasty, and cultist sexual practices. It is not necessarily a justification for homophobia or against homosexuality in general, even if it is often used as one.

 

[elmarko]

I'm actually glad we get people like those hotel owners, it's nice that they highlight the kind of bigotry that they believe in - I can think of no better way of getting people to question the actions/beliefs of the church.

Keep it up I saw, we will be an atheist nation in 50 years at this rate.

 

[elmarko]

Edit - Just to make a point, obviously not all religious people are like that, just the vocal minority (stupid thing won't let me edit).

 

[anything I don't mind]

I think it is absurd to think that b&b owners must allow gay sex on their premises, which is of course why the quiet and reserved and religious old couple was not happy about allowing two men to share a room.

If it is their opinion that gay sex is an abomination then leave it to the british government to force them to accept homosexuals on their premises.

So what happens if a group of 5 gay man arrive and they want to have an orgy, the british government is going to force a b&b owner to allow this?

 

[Nitefly]

I don't believe it. How the hell did you guys end up at scripture again!!

 

[Haggisman]

Well, then if the bigotry is so in-twined with there personal beliefs then they should not be running a business.

If they can't play by our rules - then perhaps they are in the wrong business.

I thought you were the one against discrimination

Surely the same would also be said of civil marriages and marriages done under other faiths/denominations?

Probably, I will confess I have no idea how devout Christians would look at that, but then it comes down the scenario where, if they are turning everyone away because they don't fit with their beliefs, they are very quickly going to go out of business!

A business doesn't have any beliefs. Which is the point, individuals can have human rights, businesses can't. The individuals are not stopped from holding whatever beliefs they like, they just can't start a business that discriminates due to sexuality, religion, race or gender.

Where does that leave religious organisations like the Church of England?

I'm also pretty certain I could find an opposing quote which goes directly against this point.

Also, it's not exactly a great defence - "I'm going to discriminate against you because my religion is homophobic at the core".

Regardless of it being in the religion or not, this isn't a religious country so it's pretty much meaningless anyway.

Well, all that really highlights is how contradictory the bible is, and how a backwards and outdated religion really has no place in modern society.

I'm actually glad we get people like those hotel owners, it's nice that they highlight the kind of bigotry that they believe in - I can think of no better way of getting people to question the actions/beliefs of the church.

Keep it up I saw, we will be an atheist nation in 50 years at this rate.

We can only hope

 

[Castiel]

I'm actually glad we get people like those hotel owners, it's nice that they highlight the kind of bigotry that they believe in - I can think of no better way of getting people to question the actions/beliefs of the church.

Keep it up I saw, we will be an atheist nation in 50 years at this rate.

Sure......more likely the country will simply be more secular, not necessarily more atheist. That is assuming we do not see a rise of evangelical Christianity as they have in the US or that the influx of Eastern Europeans doesn't tilt the balance the other way especially with the growth in Orthodox and Catholic Christianity along with the growth in Free Churches and non denominationals.

The actions of one couple are not representative of the actions or beliefs of all, otherwise we woukd have B&B's across the country doing the same and when the majority of a society want something, it is generally socially acceptable to do it.....

 

[elmarko]

I think it is absurd to think that b&b owners must allow gay sex on their premises, which is of course why the quiet and reserved and religious old couple was not happy about allowing two men to share a room.

If it is their opinion that gay sex is an abomination then leave it to the british government to force them to accept homosexuals on their premises.

So what happens if a group of 5 gay man arrive and they want to have an orgy, the british government is going to force a b&b owner to allow this?

That's because you are homophobic - hiding behind your interpretation of religious doctrines to justify your own prejudice.

Is adult/consensual group sex hurting anybody (assuming they cleaned up afterwards lol)?, I think you will find on the grand scheme of things promoting hatred & discrimination based on sexual preference is much worse than that.

I personally don't want to engage in that kind of thing because it's not my preference, the main difference is that I don't force my point of view down other peoples throats.

 

[Castiel]

I don't think that groen is religious.....iirc rightly he is atheist.

 

[anything I don't mind]

That's because you are homophobic - hiding behind your interpretation of religious doctrines to justify your own prejudice.

Is adult/consensual group sex hurting anybody (assuming they cleaned up afterwards lol)?, I think you will find on the grand scheme of things promoting hatred & discrimination based on sexual preference is much worse than that.

I personally don't want to engage in that kind of thing because it's not my preference, the main difference is that I don't force my point of view down other peoples throats.

You are full of it. I am not even religious.

If someone runs a B&B and they do not want orgies on their premises then that is completely reasonable. You might be perverted and many other people might be perverted and that is your choice, but do not try and force your perverted nature on to other people. There are many many places that will not have a problem with orgies on their premises. Why bother trying to visit a place and create a massive law suit out of it. This just speaks of homosexuals trying to gain further acceptance in society for their perverse nature. I am not homophobic at all, i have no problems with homosexuals. I just do not agree with it and do not think it should be encouraged.

Here listen to what the b&b owners have to say. Do you see how the homosexuals had a massive organisations behind them, this whole court case stinks. Typical british justice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcQW9UxBNHg

 

[elmarko]

The actions of one couple are not representative of the actions or beliefs of all, otherwise we woukd have B&B's across the country doing the same and when the majority of a society want something, it is generally socially acceptable to do it.....

Indeed, most of the religious people I know (I may not agree with what they believe in) are decent people.

Neither do they think it's acceptable to discriminate against people based on personal beliefs (as long as they are not hurting anybody) - I've even heard the argument "If god didn't want gay people, he wouldn't have created them" - I can accept that kind of attitude the "live and let live", which thankfully most Religious people in the UK do have (which is great).

It would be unfortunate if the American style took over in the UK.

It's not even self serving, I'm not a victim of anything (being the usual boring white English male).

 

[elmarko]

You might be perverted

many other people might be perverted

This just speaks of homosexuals trying to gain further acceptance in society

their perverse nature

I am not homophobic at all

I just do not agree with it and do not think it should be encouraged.

homosexuals had a massive organisations behind them

LOL.

You are funny, you may not be religious but you are clearly homophobic.

 

[elmarko]

Edit - What do you mean "you might be perverted", I don't engage in any active you like to label as perverted (not that there is anything wrong with it, just personal preference - I like women for one on one action myself lol).

 

[anything I don't mind]

LOL.

You are funny, you may not be religious but you are clearly homophobic.

I am not homophobic, i treat homosexuals with respect and I talk to them as i talk to everyone else. I do not agree with homosexual behaviour and i think it is a perversion as i have already explained on this forum a few times in length. But that does not make me homophobic, it just means that i do not agree with it.

But i think the religious and homosexual aspect of this case is irrelevant, it comes down to the government forcing businesses to do what they do not want to.

 

[Castiel]

I personally don't want to engage in that kind of thing because it's not my preference, the main difference is that I don't force my point of view down other peoples throats.

The same could be true of the couple who owned the B&B, The gay couple could have simply stayed somewhere else, that they allegedly targeted that specific B&B because they knew that it would be controversial could be seen as 'forcing their point if view' down someone elses throat.....pardon the pun..

We have to be careful when addressing the rights of individuals and how we prioritise them....I think the law regarding marriage should be clarified, everyone should be able to be legally married as well as everyone should be allowed to enter into a civil partnership, the law as it stands is divisive and in some respects discriminatory to both homosexuals and heterosexuals. Also Churches should retain the right to choose who they marry, they should also be actively encouraged to reassess their stance on the issue of homosexuality at the same time.

As long as there is provision for both groups and it is legislated correctly I cannot see why both sets of opinion cannot be equally provided for. We have implicit acceptable discrimination in society all the time, womens only gyms for example...it is about making sure that any one group is not unfairly or unnecessarily discriminated against, not eliminating all discrimination.

 

[Haggisman]

Why bother trying to visit a place and create a massive law suit out of it. This just speaks of homosexuals trying to gain further acceptance in society for their perverse nature. I am not homophobic at all, i have no problems with homosexuals. I just do not agree with it and do not think it should be encouraged.

While I agree in principle with what you're saying, it's not just homosexuals (or all homosexuals) who do this, replace them with any other group, and you'll find examples of people going out of their way to cause trouble.

They may in some warped way feel they are battling against inequality and making people more accepting of their group, when in actuality all they are achieving is the opposite.

Having just looked on the website for the B&B, it quite clearly says on the booking page:

"Special Note:

Here at Chymorvah we have few rules, but please note that as Christians we have a deep regard for marriage(being the union of one man to one woman for life to the exclusion of all others).

Therefore, although we extend to all a warm welcome to our home, our double bedded accommodation is not available to unmarried couples. Thank you."

There is no mention of homosexuality, and they also make it very clear what their policy is, so I can't think of any reason why this particular couple decided to arrange a stay there other than to cause trouble. This in my opinion immediately makes them ******* regardless of being gay/furries/jewish/black/disabled/old/young/ginger or any other group.