Grayling, finally a smart man

Did you agree with Mr Grayling's opinion?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 56.3%
  • No

    Votes: 7 43.8%

  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .
Sponsored Links
1 a piece at the time of writing this skitz.. Oh dear oh dear oh dear :LOL: :LOL:

Personally I think that landlords should be able to turn away MPs and catholoc priests - they have a business to run and don't need a bad reputations.

As for "gay", I suppose we're off down the merry old route of what is "normal" or not. :LOL: :rolleyes:
 
I'm not sure about this one. The crux of what he said was:
"I took the view that if it's a question of somebody who's doing a B&B in their own home, that individual should have the right to decide who does and who doesn't come into their own home.

"If they are running a hotel on the High Street, I really don't think that it is right in this day and age that a gay couple should walk into a hotel and be turned away because they are a gay couple, and I think that is where the dividing line comes."
It's the fact that it is someone's home that I have a certain amount of sympathy with. I know the law etc etc and I understand we don't want to breed homophobia.

This all came out (excuse the pun!), in this case:
In March, Cambridgeshire gay couple Michael Black and John Morgan were turned away from a guest house in Berkshire because the owner said it was against her policy to accommodate same sex couples.
I wonder if there would have been as much made of this if the B&B owners had been gay and they turned away a heterosexual couple? What I mean is, if that was me and my wife being rejected from a B&B I wouldn't go to the newspapers complaining about it!

We live in litigious times and there seem to be a stead stream of people of all walks running to the media every time they are 'offended'. I'm a little suspicious of that.
 
Sponsored Links
If you are running it as a business, then you have to follow the laws of the land - in this case the anti-discrimination ones. If you don't like it, then don't trade.

I find it wholly fascinating that this started from a pair of "Christian" landlords turning them away on religious (their beliefs) grounds.

Maybe a reflection of the nativity, or perhaps trying to imagine what jesus would have done would help them.

On the other hand, maybe they want to keep that room spare for the priest to come round for a few hours with the choir boy for those extra special little "confirmation" lessons?
 
You've said it all Blas. Spot on.

This law was brought in by the Labour Government, :rolleyes: ,,, if it was put to people of the country first in a referendum, they would have voted strongly against it,,, just look at the small poll so far.

Why should landlords have to put up with homosexual customers commiting "un-natural acts" in the bedrooms of their property.
 
No chance Dexty. Landlords should be able to decide for themselves on this issue,, not have it imposed on them by "law". :rolleyes: Sorry mate,,, my opinion.
 
See, if your religion honestly tells you that homosexuality is wrong and shouldn't be encouraged (which it does in Christianity) then that would mean simply by following your religion you would not be able to trade in any goods or services because the law forces you to not discriminate.

In this case if you are running a B n B from your own home, it is still in my mind your own home. You should have the right to make the rules.

However I do see the difference between your home and your business.

Just to let you all know where I am coming from, I am an atheist and a huge believer in human rights....however i am a huge believer property owner priviledges.
 
No chance Dexty. Landlords should be able to decide for themselves on this issue,, not have it imposed on them by "law". :rolleyes: Sorry mate,,, my opinion.
So you'd advocate a sign outside a b&b saying "No Vacancies for Blacks, Asians, Chinks, Mincers, Scots, Irish, Welsh, Atheists, Non Catholics, Plasterers, nor anyone from Nuneaton. All others welcome"
 
No chance Dexty. Landlords should be able to decide for themselves on this issue,, not have it imposed on them by "law". :rolleyes: Sorry mate,,, my opinion.
So you'd advocate a sign outside a b&b saying "No Vacancies for Blacks, Asians, Chinks, Mincers, Scots, Irish, Welsh, Atheists, Non Catholics, Plasterers, nor anyone from Nuneaton. All others welcome"

If they had a real reason to not want to let these people into their homes, then yes. I don't mean "Oh I just don't like them" ..I mean a " I honestly believe i will be cast down into a pit of fire and burn for all eternity with no respite".

Obviously the practicality of this is very hard, but theoretically you can understand the dilemma.
 
So all that talk over the last couple of days about the need to follow the laws of the land etc etc was just posturing then?
 
So all that talk over the last couple of days about the need to follow the laws of the land etc etc was just posturing then?

Definately not. They are still doing something illegal and should be treated as such until, if ever, the law is changed.
If I remember correctly Grayling voted in favour of the discrimination laws.
All he is saying, and I agree, is that if changes to the law could be made to differentiate on this particular issue, it would be a good way to go.

I'm definately not advocating attacking policeman just trying to do their job in thuggish riots ;)

Use the system, don't fight it. :)
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top