Are they In the wrong business?

[Gaylord]

not exactly the same thing but.. a number of years ago I was with the mot & her (female) friend in a poplar west of IRL town over a bank holiday w/e. Almost all the B&Bs were sold out so we booked a room through the tourist office.. when the three of us showed up, the auld battleaxe who ran the place obviously didn't like that a) the couple weren't married & b) we had a ladyfriend in tow who was to share the room with us.. so she make all sorts of 1950s type comments to try to make us feel uncomfortable ( that worked- not! we were just glad to have a room for the night) .. so that evening the three of us put on a big sound display in the room with bedsprings, fake moaning etc. But interestingly enough at breakfast ( ie just prior to getting her MONEY) the old bat was nice as pie;
She'd have been well within her rights to turn us away ..but most times cash talks louder than principles

Did you complain via the tourist office?, if you felt the B&B owner was not extending a Failte welcome!

GL


GL

[Mousey]

The Gay couple were/are members of stonewall, however that is like being signed up to Greenpeace or friends of the earth...It doesn't mean that they knew that the organisation (Stonewall) had contacted the hotel prior to their arrival.GL

I'm sure it was all just an amazing coincidence, GL!!!

So - on what information do you base your opinion that the couple were being bullied? Why do you claim there was 'fake moral outrage'? I would have thought pointing out discrimination was something to be lauded, not sneered at. Which parts of my post do you not consider correct?

Alright - I was harsh in my evaluation. However, I still think Stonewall was wrong to create this scandal. I feel that they used the law to their advantage against this couple. I think that these two hoteliers' beliefs are just as valid as the right of gay couples to be together. Would things have not been better served by the gay community just ignoring their hotel and taking their business elsewhere?

[scotus]

Alright - I was harsh in my evaluation. However, I still think Stonewall was wrong to create this scandal. I feel that they used the law to their advantage against this couple. I think that these two hoteliers' beliefs are just as valid as the right of gay couples to be together. Would things have not been better served by the gay community just ignoring their hotel and taking their business elsewhere?

Well, no, I don't. If something is wrong, it's wrong, and it should be opposed.

I think there are two quite separate issues here:

1) The hotelier's beliefs are as valid as the gay couples
2) Discrimination against minorities should not be allowed.

The answer to this dichotomy is, I believe, given in the title of the thread. The hoteliers have chosen a business which is inevitably going to clash with their beliefs.

[Mousey]

If the hoteliers put up a sign saying "The Management Reserve the Right to Refuse Admission", I wonder would they get away with it? After all, you see that sign up everywhere.

[scotus]

If the hoteliers put up a sign saying "The Management Reserve the Right to Refuse Admission", I wonder would they get away with it? After all, you see that sign up everywhere.

Might get away with it once.

But it would be relatively simple to build a case against them if any more than that

[Gaylord]

If the hoteliers put up a sign saying "The Management Reserve the Right to Refuse Admission", I wonder would they get away with it? After all, you see that sign up everywhere.

To refuse entry but not to discriminate whilst doing so..

GL

[northernwaster]

Looks like you didn't read the article.

Two guys try to book a room and are refused - where are you getting the 'hero' angle from?

The hero gays trying to pick a fight thats not there as usual.

If they turned away a known peado no one would care - ITS THEIR HOME they have a RIGHT to turn away people they do not want in their own home.