Full rights for the LGBT community.

token56

SoulandForm wrote: »

We are all bigots to a certain degree and I dont think all bigotry is necessarily bad; what is wrong about being bigoted against those who see child abuse and rape as acceptable for instance?

This is just pure bullsh*t really. There is a world of difference between being bigoted towards someone who accepts child abuse or rape as acceptable, and someone being bigoted towards two consenting adults who wish to share the same bed.

You seem to make the conclusion that because its ok to bigoted towards something like child abuse, we should accept bigotry in line with other incomparable personal beliefs. Just ludicrous.

junder

oscarBravo wrote: »

So if a religion required its adherents to discriminate against people of different races the same way it requires them to discriminate against people of different sexualities, the law should accomodate that?

We have 3 major faiths that do preach that homosexuality is a sin, should we ban these religions? Should church's, mosques and synagogs be forced to marry same sex couples? Why should people's rights always be a competition with other people's rights surly mutual respect is the way forward. I firmly believe that same sex couples should not be discriminated against in adoption, in the work place in society in general likewise I believe that in a persons home regardless of wether or not they run a business, thier religious views should be respected. I was listening to a news report today and apparently the coupe on question would not allow in married heterosexual couples to share a room, which again according to thier faith is a sin

aloyisious

SoulandForm wrote: »

Okay what is a B and B owner refuses to rent a room to a non-married hetrosexual couple on the grounds of opposition to pre-marital sex, do you think that that should be illegal?

I dont think also you can talk about homosexual persons the same way that you can talk about black persons or English persons or whatever; you can talk about homosexual acts and people who are either addicted or pre-disposed to them. Comparing a B and B owner not wanting homosexual acts preformed on his property to a B and B owner refusing to rent to say Asians I believe is wrong.

Also you have to understand that Muslims, Christians, Jews and Sikhs dont see homosexual acts as merely distasteful but actually deeply evil. The Roman Catholic Church for instance which is the largest Christian Church in Ireland sees homosexual acts as being equal to willful murder and the oppression of the poor.

@SoulandForm: It seem's to me that the points you posted above in this debate are based around the opinion that when a homosexual couple (or even an unmarried couple) request or share a double-bed that they are going to have sexual congress. Other people could well say use the expression "you have a dirty mind" to describe your apparent preconception that merely because people share a double-bed they are going to have sex together.

One of the other points you mention indicates you apparently believe that all homosexuals are non-christian, non-jewish, non-muslim, non-sikh, or whichever other religious belief you choose to add to your list.

I'd like you to get an official representative of the Roman Catholic Church to openly issue a statement to the media (or on here) stating that it is the view of the RCC that homosexual acts are the same as wilful murder and the oppression of the poor.

Personally I believe that your stated opinions have no credibility and have been posted purely to gain attention and excite angry responses.

aloyisious

junder wrote: »

We have 3 major faiths that do preach that homosexuality is a sin, should we ban these religions? Should church's, mosques and synagogs be forced to marry same sex couples? Why should people's rights always be a competition with other people's rights surly mutual respect is the way forward. I firmly believe that same sex couples should not be discriminated against in adoption, in the work place in society in general likewise I believe that in a persons home regardless of wether or not they run a business, thier religious views should be respected. I was listening to a news report today and apparently the coupe on question would not allow in married heterosexual couples to share a room, which again according to thier faith is a sin

My understanding is that NO religion or church/place of worship is/will be forced to perform same-sex couple marriages or weddings in any statute law propsals or plans. That is being done on the basis you mention; mutual respect of other peoples religious beliefs.

As with SoulandForm's mention of persons operating a guesthouse for profit under the Civil Statute Laws of whatever country refusing the custom of O/P's merely because of preconceptions, I think you'll find the guesthouse operator is well aware that they freely entered into agreement to comply with the laws, and would fall foul of those laws if they did not operate within the same laws remit. If they don't want to honour their word, they should close up shop and hand in their guesthouse licence.

SoulandForm

aloyisious wrote: »

I'd like you to get an official representative of the Roman Catholic Church to openly issue a statement to the media (or on here) stating that it is the view of the RCC that homosexual acts are the same as wilful murder and the oppression of the poor.

Personally I believe that your stated opinions have no credibility and have been posted purely to gain attention and excite angry responses.

There is a list in the old Missal of sins calling for vengence from Heaven- among them is homosexuality.

My stated opinions on what exactly? You might find it weird but Ulster folk on both sides of the fence dont have in majority the same PC views on homosexuality that southerners have-"gay bashing" (which I condemn as evil) has its UK capital in Derry. Infact the pro-homosexual/anti-Christian extremism of many in the south is making me re-think my views on the border; maybe for all the nightmare we would be better off and safer within the UK (my views on British militarism and that Loyalism=fascism will not be changing though).

token56

junder wrote: »

We have 3 major faiths that do preach that homosexuality is a sin, should we ban these religions? Should church's, mosques and synagogs be forced to marry same sex couples? Why should people's rights always be a competition with other people's rights surly mutual respect is the way forward. I firmly believe that same sex couples should not be discriminated against in adoption, in the work place in society in general likewise I believe that in a persons home regardless of wether or not they run a business, thier religious views should be respected. I was listening to a news report today and apparently the coupe on question would not allow in married heterosexual couples to share a room, which again according to thier faith is a sin

This here is where the main conflict arises in my opinion. No logical person would say that we should ban religions or that church's etc should be forced to marry same sex couples. Nobody I can see is looking for this to happen. But I do not agree with the highlighted part above. As soon as a person starts to use their home as a place of business in a secular society, whether as a B&B or something else, I do not think religious beliefs should be protected when said beliefs may discriminate against a section of society in a way that prevents that section being afforded the same rights as all others in society.

I accept everyone has a right to their own beliefs and can act in accordance with their own beliefs in their own personal time and their own home as long as it does not impact negatively on those around them within reason. But as soon as they start using their home as a business they have made a choice to offer a service to the general population. They should not be allowed pick and choose who can avail of said service in accordance with their personal beliefs.

junder

aloyisious wrote: »

My understanding is that NO religion or church/place of worship is/will be forced to perform same-sex couple marriages or weddings in any statute law propsals or plans. That is being done on the basis you mention; mutual respect of other peoples religious beliefs.

As with SoulandForm's mention of persons operating a guesthouse for profit under the Civil Statute Laws of whatever country refusing the custom of O/P's merely because of preconceptions, I think you'll find the guesthouse operator is well aware that they freely entered into agreement to comply with the laws, and would fall foul of those laws if they did not operate within the same laws remit. If they don't want to honour their word, they should close up shop and hand in their guesthouse licence.

Under European human rights legislation a gay couple could take a church to court for refusing to marry them. Incidentally the lady in the clip I provided has said that if such a thing was to happen she would get the pup to withdraw the its supper of gay marriage, ( for those that have not listened to the clip the lady in question is already in a civil partnership with her partner). What I gave not yet said that while I had some concerns about gay marriage this articulate young lady convinced me of her argument to support her proposal, I hope we have more articulate loyalists like her step forward

oscarBravo

junder wrote: »

We have 3 major faiths that do preach that homosexuality is a sin, should we ban these religions?

Who's talking about banning religions? I'm simply talking about religious beliefs not being an acceptable reason to discriminate against gay people.

...surly mutual respect is the way forward.

I'm not sure what part of "I refuse to do business with you because of your sexual orientation" is supposed to be consistent with mutual respect.

...apparently the coupe on question would not allow in married heterosexual couples to share a room, which again according to thier faith is a sin

Contraception is a sin. Should guesthouses be allowed to stipulate that married couples not use contraception on the premises?

oscarBravo

junder wrote: »

Under European human rights legislation a gay couple could take a church to court for refusing to marry them.

I doubt it.

Iwasfrozen

token56 wrote: »

This here is where the main conflict arises in my opinion. No logical person would say that we should ban religions or that church's etc should be forced to marry same sex couples. Nobody I can see is looking for this to happen. But I do not agree with the highlighted part above. As soon as a person starts to use their home as a place of business in a secular society, whether as a B&B or something else, I do not think religious beliefs should be protected when said beliefs may discriminate against a section of society in a way that prevents that section being afforded the same rights as all others in society.

I accept everyone has a right to their own beliefs and can act in accordance with their own beliefs in their own personal time and their own home as long as it does not impact negatively on those around them within reason. But as soon as they start using their home as a business they have made a choice to offer a service to the general population. They should not be allowed pick and choose who can avail of said service in accordance with their personal beliefs.

But you have to have a right to deny the services of your business to anyone you want without giving a reason. Otherwise the entire capitalist concept of private ownership of business is compromised.

oscarBravo

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

But you have to have a right to deny the services of your business to anyone you want without giving a reason. Otherwise the entire capitalist concept of private ownership of business is compromised.

So it's OK to discriminate, as long as you lie about your reasons for discrimination?

junder

oscarBravo wrote: »

Who's talking about banning religions? I'm simply talking about religious beliefs not being an acceptable reason to discriminate against gay people. I'm not sure what part of "I refuse to do business with you because of your sexual orientation" is supposed to be consistent with mutual respect. Contraception is a sin. Should guesthouses be allowed to stipulate that married couples not use contraception on the premises?

So in this case the rights of the gay coupe superceed the rights of the Christian couple? Lets say I fancied a holiday in Torquay What if i went to book this hotel

http://www.keywesttorquay.co.uk/

Should I be taking them to court for discriminating against me as a heterosexual male and my female partner, or should I just accept that it's a gay men only hotel and look to book else where

28064212

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

But you have to have a right to deny the services of your business to anyone you want without giving a reason.

You don't actually. If a shop turns away every single black person without explicitly saying it's because they're black, they can still be prosecuted under discrimination legislation

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Otherwise the entire capitalist concept of private ownership of business is compromised.

No, one small facet of the capitalist concept is compromised. And unless you're for the complete de-regulation of every single industry and lifting of every restriction of every substance for sale, then you support compromising the capitalist concept as well

28064212

junder wrote: »

So in this case the rights of the gay coupe superceed the rights of the Christian couple? Lets say I fancied a holiday in Torquay What if i went to book this hotel

http://www.keywesttorquay.co.uk/

Should I be taking them to court for discriminating against me as a heterosexual male and my female partner, or should I just accept that it's a gay men only hotel and look to book else where

...

To comply with the equalities act we are a Private Members Club catering for Gay & Bisexual Men. Membership is included when booking

oscarBravo

junder wrote: »

So in this case the rights of the gay coupe superceed the rights of the Christian couple? Lets say I fancied a holiday in Torquay What if i went to book this hotel

http://www.keywesttorquay.co.uk/

Should I be taking them to court for discriminating against me as a heterosexual male and my female partner, or should I just accept that it's a gay men only hotel and look to book else where

How about you answer my contraception question, then I'll deal with this one.

token56

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

But you have to have a right to deny the services of your business to anyone you want without giving a reason. Otherwise the entire capitalist concept of private ownership of business is compromised.

Yes, but as long as the reason is not against public policy. If the reason you deny your service of business is against public policy you do not have the right to deny a service. If ones public beliefs are against public policy then sorry but either allow them avail of your service or no longer offer your service if you feel a conflict of interest. If ones public beliefs are in line with public policy, no problem, you are lucky.

The question is should irrational/rational personal beliefs which are derived from religious doctrine be afford protection under public policy. In a secular society, of which Ireland is, I think not. Religious doctrine should not directly shape public policy, there is simply no need for it. Public policy should be based on evidence driven, rational, well thought out and debated morals and ethics. Of course religion can be included in such debates but it should always be the wider society that is thought of first when making such policies.

junder

28064212 wrote: »

...

So that's the caveat then, if I'm running a b&b if I make it a private members b&b ( membership included in the booking) I can be selective in who I allow to stay?

aloyisious

SoulandForm wrote: »

There is a list in the old Missal of sins calling for vengence from Heaven- among them is homosexuality.

My stated opinions on what exactly? You might find it weird but Ulster folk on both sides of the fence dont have in majority the same PC views on homosexuality that southerners have-"gay bashing" (which I condemn as evil) has its UK capital in Derry. Infact the pro-homosexual/anti-Christian extremism of many in the south is making me re-think my views on the border; maybe for all the nightmare we would be better off and safer within the UK (my views on British militarism and that Loyalism=fascism will not be changing though).

Going off-topic here in response to your anti-christian extremism quote above, I'd say the sins of the fathers resulted in Christians on this side of the border having their eyes opened as to what was going on around them in the name of Christianity and those newly opened eyes (mote-removed) view things in the manner of true Christianity, beginning with treating other humans with respect.

28064212

junder wrote: »

So that's the caveat then, if I'm running a b&b if I make it a private members b&b ( membership included in the booking) I can be selective in who I allow to stay?

Apparently*. But the simple fact of the matter is that the B&B is not a private members' club, and they were breaking the law

*IANAL

junder

oscarBravo wrote: »

How about you answer my contraception question, then I'll deal with this one.

How about you answer the question I put to you about staying in a Muslim run b&b, should I demand ( and haven these demands met ) to eat non halal meat or pork and have my partner wear next nothing ( as long as its still decent or at least what western society still deems as decent) as is our right or should I be respectful of the religious beliefs of the Muslim hosts?

aloyisious

junder wrote: »

How about you answer the question I put to you about staying in a Muslim run b&b, should I demand ( and haven these demands met ) to eat non halal meat or pork and have my partner wear next nothing ( as long as its still decent or at least what western society still deems as decent) as is our right or should I be respectful of the religious beliefs of the Muslim hosts?

In Rome, do what Romans; do within the law of the land. Ditto applies to the country you are living-in/visiting.

token56

junder wrote: »

So that's the caveat then, if I'm running a b&b if I make it a private members b&b ( membership included in the booking) I can be selective in who I allow to stay?

Based on the ruling made by the district court in the case with Portmarnock Golf Club, clubs are afford the right to exclude certain types of members only if the club promotes activity for a specific group. The subsequent hight counrt ruling muddies the waters even further but I'm not sure how it would apply in such a private members b&b as you described above. I really have no idea regarding the legality of creating such an establishment.

oscarBravo

junder wrote: »

How about you answer the question I put to you about staying in a Muslim run b&b, should I demand ( and haven these demands met ) to eat non halal meat or pork and have my partner wear next nothing ( as long as its still decent or at least what western society still deems as decent) as is our right or should I be respectful of the religious beliefs of the Muslim hosts?

You have a choice about what you eat or wear. You don't have a choice about your sexual orientation. I'm not aware of any equality legislation covering your desire to eat pork.

Now, about that contraception question?

token56

aloyisious wrote: »

In Rome, do what Romans; do within the law of the land. Ditto applies to the country you are living-in/visiting.

Exactly, you do what is within the public policy of the country you are staying in, and the establishment you are obtaining a service off should afford you those rights. If public policy of the country is that you must obey Muslim law, then you should do so.

junder

oscarBravo wrote: »

You have a choice about what you eat or wear. You don't have a choice about your sexual orientation. I'm not aware of any equality legislation covering your desire to eat pork.

Now, about that contraception question?

You are correct I have a choice, but that's not really the point is it, the point is does the Muslim owners of the imaginary b&b have the right to refuse to meet my demands. As for contraception, I my faith it's not seen as a sin, so your point is not really relevant. However if what I heard on the news is correct, this couple would have refused my right to share a room with my partner because we are not married regardless of how long we have been together and the fact we have a child together. Had my custom been refused on that grounds then I would have taken my custom else where

token56

junder wrote: »

does the Muslim owners of the imaginary b&b have the right to refuse to meet my demands.

What country is this imaginary b&b in? In Ireland, no they shouldn't, in another country they may well have that right.

rodento

Is the proposed referendum dealing with marriage or full equal rights including adoption of children

junder

token56 wrote: »

What country is this imaginary b&b in? In Ireland, no they shouldn't, in another country they may well have that right.

Well I would have said the uk but the republic would do as a setting as well. What about my responsibility that goes along with my rights, surly I have a responsibility to respect the religious beliefs of these Muslim owners of this imaginary b&b

Nodin

rodento wrote: »

Is the proposed referendum dealing with marriage or full equal rights including adoption of children

Marriage alone. Adoption will be brought in beforehand, afaik.

28064212

junder wrote: »

You are correct I have a choice, but that's not really the point is it, the point is does the Muslim owners of the imaginary b&b have the right to refuse to meet my demands.

Of course they do. You seem to be missing the fundamental issue here. The B&B owners did not refuse to meet the gay couples' demands. They refused to provide a service to them that they do provide to others based purely on their sexual orientation. Your halal comparison is completely irrelevant