I think that it has been used by the church to show tolerance. Which is clearly lacking in this case.

A good result.
No business can be allowed to discriminate. Yes, it may be their house, but the fact it's a business too overrules any personal rights on your choices. If you can't treat people equally, then you shouldn't be running that type of business at all.

I wonder if a "No unmarried couples allowed to share" rule would be legal in a B&B, or is that discriminating too?

It's a serious question. There's plenty of good, honest well meaning folk who don't believe unmarried couples should share a bed. To many, allowing such things is only one step removed from renting a room by the hour to whores.

Personally, I'd just warn of a laundry surcharge for excessive soiling of the bed and let them get on with it. The same rule would apply to everyone, be they newly wedded or incontinent elderly couples.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, a sizeable number of "christians" in this country are just sad little bigots who use the "good book" to justify their disgusting attitude towards fellow human beings. Sadly, one of my parents is amongst them.

This is a good result. As has been said, you lose your rights to your personal views once you start running your business. Businesses should not be in a position to discriminate against anyone on the basis of their race, nationality, gender, age, sexuality or any other such factor. TBH I won't even excuse turning away unmarried couples.

If you want to follow the teachings of the bible then that's your choice, but to then force those moral "standards" on other people is a disgraceful act and should not be done in the course of business.

Well in the forties it was enforced, Just watch "D-Day the Sixth of June" when the lead character has taken his girlfriend to a hotel on the coast and because they are not married they are given separate rooms. We have moved on from that attitude.

The Patriot has a seen where Heath Ledger is sewn up in a sack. Better than zipped up in a bag I suppose.

Apparently thats the reason they were turned away (in court anyway).

No unmarried couples allowed to share and in the eyes of a "Christian" a civil partnership is not marriage.

I wonder what would happen if a Muslim couple married under Islamic law were to try and book in?

F*cking religion. It has no f*cking point.

Silly petty bigotry aside, personally I think the decision was wrong. I don't see why anyone should curtail their belief (however morally stunted) in the ambigious pursuit of satisfying all others and their "human rights".

If it were a council-run operation then I can see a place of "equality wins over all" but otheriwse I just don't agree with (in my eyes contradictory) notions like this:







My business, My hotel, My rules.

Innit.

I presume they were refunded. Just [LIFTED] off and go somewhere else. There's no need for a court case.

Agreed.

Apparently the court judgement requires the B&B owners to pay the couple £1800. Each (which I find rather nonsensical tbh - are they a couple or are they individuals?). Given the way things are, that'll probably force the B&B into liquidation.

I assume this means that in future all B&Bs will be very specific about their arrangements at booking time, which if not securing them against liability will at least mean the scope for financial losses are limited.

I saw the couple interviewed on breakfast telly actually. They struck me as a bit... odd (and it has nothing to do with their sexuality thank you). They looked more like identical twins than a couple. I'm sure they were wearing the same design of shirt.

Jon

I thought the same thing.

I wonder how many unmarried straight couples were turned away, or if it was just a gay thing.

He has moved on to a box now.

Can't believe I wrote seen instead of scene.