Cookham Discussion Board
March 21, 2019, 04:37:22 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
21 March 2019 - Cookham WI Annual Bridge Drive

21 March 2019 - Cookham Book Club

22 March 2019 - Echoes of Swing Big Band in Concert

26 May 2019 - Dawn Chorus Walk

TO REGISTER TO POST ON THIS DISCUSSION BOARD email the Webmaster@cookham.com with a User name you would like. This is due to spammers.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11
  Print  
Author Topic: I was shocked to learn...  (Read 121450 times)
MLP
Guest
« Reply #45 on: March 22, 2010, 04:11:49 PM »

Not at all, far from it.  I am not discrimating against anyone.  If she doesn't want gay people under her roof, as I have already said, that is her decision.  However, there is a law in this country to protect gay people against such discrimination.  End of story.  Can't be argued against becasue it exists.  Is the law discrimnatory? I don't know.  What I do know is that it protects some very vulnerable members of our society, and is, therefore, in my mind a good law.

I fail to understand how you think she has been discriminated against anyway.  No one has said the Wilkinsons can't practice their faith.  No one has burnt down their place of worship.  No one has turned them away from a B&B because they don't want Christians sharing a bed under their roof.  And the last time I looked, the Ten Commandments do not insist that thou shalt not have gay adult men in your house as paying guests.  So where have Mr and Mrs Wilkinson been discriminated against?  What has happened is some sensible and fair minded people have actually said, hang on a minute we don't like this behaviour and we consider it to be wrong.
Logged
Showem
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 365


« Reply #46 on: March 22, 2010, 04:32:33 PM »

Well said MLP.
Logged
Bagheera
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 448

e tenebris lux


« Reply #47 on: March 22, 2010, 05:07:15 PM »

From the Wilkinsons point of view, they are not actually discriminating against gay people by doing this, they are discriminating against a particular activity.  They would, I presume, see it in the same way as not permitting smoking in their home (maybe a bad example since that would be illegal now anyway but it illustrates my point).

They make the discrimination because their faith says they may not have two men (or presumably women) share a bed in their home.

If we then say, as, through the Law, we do, "because of that you cannot run a bed and breakfast at all", we are discriminating against them on the grounds of their religious beliefs.

I agree that the only alternative is to discriminate against these two gentlemen but whichever you choose it will favour one party over the other and that is discrimination.

So I agree with MLP that the vulnerable should be protected and we do need laws to do that.

But there needs to be a trade off.  If you want to see what happens if one side insists on asserting their wishes without regard to the conflicting sensitivities of others, look at Northern Ireland, or Kosovo, or Gaza, or Baghdad.

Attacking the Wilkinsons may harm them but, like Newshound, I do not think it will further the cause of the attackers.

There are few better recruiting sergeants and a martyr and I suspect there are those whose views really are extreme that may see it as an excuse for action that none of us, including the Wilkinsons, would condone.
Logged
MLP
Guest
« Reply #48 on: March 22, 2010, 05:39:52 PM »

But Bhangeera no where in the bible does it say that 'thou shalt not allow gay men to share a bed in your B&B'.  There are a few comments here and there, but the over riding teachings are to love the sinner and hate the sin.  Fair enough.  But it would seem the Wilkinsons decision was purely made on a belief that homosexuality is wrong.  I back this argument up by the fact we have freinds who have stayed at the B&B in the past (twice and both times had a very comfortable stay).  However, they are not married, lapsed Catholic and have a child.  They were not, however, turned away by the Wilkinsons.  They were not even asked if they were married.  They were instead welcomed into their property and their money gratefully accepted.  Why so?  Could it because they are heterosexual and therefore, 'normal'?  So on the one hand the Wilkinsons using their religious convictions to turn away two gay men from their B&B.  However, on the other hand we have an unmarried couple who have obviously had sex before marriage being accepted, when the Bible is probably a lot more explicit in it's teachings of no sex before marriage etc.  This is why I find it so difficult to understand why you are still trying to defend their discriminatory behaviour.  If they are going to use their religious convictions as a reason to bar people this should extend to anything and everyone who does not fit into what they consider to be acceptable to their beliefs.  Anything otherwise smacks of hypocrisy. 

However, I am confidentthings will change.  It's not so many years ago that being illegitimate carried huge social stigma to all involved, but things change.  So, as I have said before, hopefully by having this dialogue people will start to reflect on their 'convictions' and see how they may be seen as discriminatory.  Rome wasn't built in a day.

As for your reference to Northern Ireland etc the one common link in all of them is religion.......
Logged
Simes
Full Member
***
Posts: 120


« Reply #49 on: March 22, 2010, 05:51:33 PM »

From the Wilkinsons point of view, they are not actually discriminating against gay people by doing this, they are discriminating against a particular activity. 


I imagine after a good night of dinner & theatre, the only "particular activity" the guys were hoping for was a good night's sleep in a comfy bed!
Logged
Ricardo
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 99


WWW
« Reply #50 on: March 22, 2010, 05:51:50 PM »

This will be my last post on this subject because, by now, it's easy to see where we all stand and circular arguments lead us nowhere. So I shall just ask this: Bagheera, next time I invite my friends to see a play in the village I am proud to call home, what shall I do?

Only invite my heterosexual friends (as an actor, this may be difficult!)?

Invite my homosexual friends but advise them they may not be able to stay?

Advise the local B&Bs to include information on their website as to their religious views and who may or may not be welcome in their establishment (certainly the phrase 'a warm welcome to all' on the Swiss B&B website now seems a little disingenuous)?

Advise all my friends, when making their bookings, to declare all activities and pecadiloes that may be distasteful to some?

And I think the most telling quote from the Bucks Free Press article, below, is 'We would say actually we obey other laws, we obey God's laws.' This is the kind of woman you're defending, Bagheera, someone who considers herself above the law. Substitute the word 'Allah' for God in the above quote, and would you still be so tolerant?
« Last Edit: March 23, 2010, 08:00:37 PM by Ricardo » Logged
Pongo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 347


« Reply #51 on: March 22, 2010, 06:07:01 PM »

From the Bucks Free press:

http://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/5076144.Gay_row_hotel_owners__we_ll_defend_our_views/

It looks as if it has also made Twitter, as well as African TV not to mention all the UK national press, radio and TV.

I suppose if the church can get away with homophobic and even misogynist thinking I can understand the lady in question feeling she can too.
Logged
hcm2000
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


« Reply #52 on: March 22, 2010, 06:23:02 PM »

The B&B owner was wrong to turn the guests away, lets just clear that up first.  It's not something I would ever have done as I am a gay man myself.

But let's be sensible here.  What do the two men hope to achieve be going to the police?  All the aggro and drama created has only worsened the situation.  I mean, there are so many worse things that can happen to you than being turned away from a guest house.  Yes, its illigal to discriminate in this way.  But why not just accept that some people have different viewpoints - it was her home after all.

The B&B owner is certainly paying for her action, albeit silly ones.  But her views will not change now, and if we REALLY want to beat homophobia, then we must show people that we can be mature and rise above all the daft people who disagree with us, not be silly drama queens and make the situation a whole lot worse.
Logged
hcm2000
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


« Reply #53 on: March 22, 2010, 06:27:41 PM »

I also want to add that the lady was not abusive and she refunded all monies.  What more do you want?

Please, lets show people that gay people can be just as mature.
Logged
AndyP2001Z
Newbie
*
Posts: 1


« Reply #54 on: March 22, 2010, 06:42:04 PM »

Darth Vader - you seem to have missed the point - when you're in Britain you need to adhere to the laws of Britain. When you're running a business - you need to adhere to the laws that apply to running that business. Turning people away because they are gay is just the same as turning people away because they are black, or because they have a disability - it's unlawful ... and if you break the law you have to face the conseqences - it doesn't matter whether you agree with the law - that's it - fact - end of!
Logged
MLP
Guest
« Reply #55 on: March 22, 2010, 06:45:41 PM »

we must show people that we can be mature and rise above all the daft people who disagree with us, not be silly drama queens and make the situation a whole lot worse

Is that so hmc?  What about the Suffragettes?  Were they silly drama queens?  Or all the men and women who fought for equality for gays and lesbians?  Were they drama queens?  Or the American Civil Rights Movement? Or the Jews and anti-fascists who joined together on Cable Street to fight Oswald Moseley and the Black Shirts/  Were they drama queens?  I believe some even died for their beliefs.  Sometimes, you have to make a bit of a noise to be heard.  Only then do things change.  Not that I am suggesting descending on the Wilkinsons with placards or marching up and down Cookham High Street.  But these guys are well within their rights to go to the police and take this matter further.  And why should they 'just accept it'?  To you it may not seem the worse thing to happen, but you are looking at it objectively.  You weren't being turned away from the B&B.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 07:18:03 PM by MLP » Logged
hcm2000
Newbie
*
Posts: 3


« Reply #56 on: March 22, 2010, 07:16:37 PM »

Oh get real!

And if they wanted to 'make a bit of noise' then there are far more sensible ways of going about it.

Yes, she was wrong to break the law, but by blowing this out of all proportion, are the two men really any better than her?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 07:20:10 PM by hcm2000 » Logged
Bagheera
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 448

e tenebris lux


« Reply #57 on: March 22, 2010, 07:38:49 PM »

Ricardo

I am sorry if we have to fall out over this.  I took up the Wilkinsons' position because I felt they were being pilloried and, whilst you may think it was deserved, I can see the other side of the argument.

It think it is a genuine incompatibility of beliefs and conscience.

I can see ways that it might have been handled better by both sides but am not looking at it on the spur of the moment.

I do not think the fact that the Wilkinsons are unable to condone the lifestyle of your friends and feel unable to accept them sharing a bed in their home makes them homophobes or that your friends are "christianophobes" because they disagree.  And as far as I can tell, neither side welcomes "phobic" hysteria that seems to be lending allegiance.

I fear that an incident of this nature was probably an inevitable consequence of a law which does not recognise such incompatibilities and allows the rights of one to automatically trump those of another.

The Wilkinsons behaviour seems to amount to Civil Disobedience.  As MLP has observed, there is a long history of it - if it had not happened then homosexuality might still be illegal.

Of course if you engage in Civil Disobedience you have to face the consequences but I hope that this incident might lead to a more constructive way for the gay and evangelical Christian communities to resolve their differences and, even though they will probably never see eye to eye, learn to live and let live.
Logged
Bagheera
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 448

e tenebris lux


« Reply #58 on: March 22, 2010, 10:40:59 PM »

Well at least gayguy is not discriminating - it seems he hates us all!
Logged
coolmoonriver
Guest
« Reply #59 on: March 22, 2010, 11:02:05 PM »

i support the swiss cottage for not allowing 2 men to sleep together under their roof. good for you !!!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 11
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!