Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

"No marriage certificate, NO MARRIAGE BED!"...

  • 18-01-2011 02:51PM
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    What does AH think of this?!?

    Sarah Gordon and Kat Higgins, Sky News Online
    The Christian owners of a seaside guesthouse acted unlawfully by refusing to let a gay couple share a double bed, a judge has ruled in a landmark case.


    Peter and Hazelmary Bull did not allow civil partners Martyn Hall and Steven Preddy to use a double room in their Cornwall B&B because it would be "an affront to their faith".
    However, a judge at Bristol County Court said the couple were breaking the law by denying the men a room.
    Mr Hall and Mr Preddy were each awarded £1,800 in damages.
    The couple said they were extremely happy with the outcome of the case.
    "When we booked this hotel we just wanted to do something that thousands of
    other couples do every weekend - take a relaxing weekend break away.
    "We're really pleased that the judge has confirmed what we already know - that in these circumstances our civil partnership has the same status in law as a marriage between a man and a woman, and that, regardless of each person's religious beliefs, no-one is above the law."


    Mr Preddy booked a room at the B&B in 2008 and Mrs Bull assumed he was bringing his wife with him.
    When he arrived with his civil partner Mr Hall, the pair were refused a double room by the manager Bernie Quinn, who instead offered them seperate single rooms.
    The Preddys used the 2007 Equality Act Regulations to bring the case to court, claiming £5,000 in damages.
    A month before Mr Preddy booked to stay at the B&B, Stonewall, the gay rights organisation, had warned the Bulls that a notice on their website about who could and could not stay was illegal.
    The notice read: "We have few rules but please note that out of a deep regard for marriage we prefer to let double accommodation to heterosexual married couples only."

    Peter and Hazelmary Bull have strict religious beliefs
    Ben Summerskill, from Stonewall, welcomed the ruling.
    He said: "You can't turn away people from a hotel because they're black or Jewish and in 2011 you shouldn't be able to demean them by turning them away because they're gay either.
    "Religious freedom shouldn't be used as a cloak for prejudice."
    Mrs Bull has argued that even her brother and his female partner were not allowed to share a room in her house due to her strict religious beliefs.
    Their legal fees were paid for by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, while Mr and Mrs Bull's defence was funded by The Christian Institute.
    Outside court Mrs Bull said the result was a disappointment.
    "Our double-bed policy was based on our sincere beliefs about marriage, not hostility to anybody," she said.


    http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Gay-Couple-Win-BB-Discrimination-Case-Against-Christian-Owners-Damages-Of-1800-Each/Article/201101315897770?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15897770_Gay_Couple_Win_BB_Discrimination_Case_Against_Christian_Owners%2C_Damages_Of_%3F1%2C800_Each


«13456711

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭snickerpuss


    If they have such strict religious beliefs they might want to get out of the B&B business.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,295 ✭✭✭✭Duggy747


    What was the €3600 for, to pay for the fuel they needed to drive to another B&B?


  • Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,202 ✭✭✭Rabidlamb


    Proper order, the pink pound should be well able to afford a hotel.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭scientific1982


    I think its boring.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,396 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Would they have asked two heterosexual people for proof they were married? I think not.


  • Posts: 81,308 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Mitchell Handsome Couch


    "When we booked this hotel we just wanted to do something that thousands of
    other couples do every weekend - take a relaxing weekend break away."

    A month before Mr Preddy booked to stay at the B&B, Stonewall, the gay rights organisation, had warned the Bulls that a notice on their website about who could and could not stay was illegal.
    The notice read: "We have few rules but please note that out of a deep regard for marriage we prefer to let double accommodation to heterosexual married couples only."

    They booked it despite knowing this policy?
    Sure, go right ahead, but "we just wanted a relaxing weekend break away"? Political fight more like


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 34,418 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    I do not care TBH,


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,967 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    The Preddys used the 2007 Equality Act Regulations to bring the case to court, claiming £5,000 in damages.

    How are they out of pocket by so much? At the very most they would have to get alternative accommodation so that's a few hundred

    Ca-ching, some easy compo here


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Illegal to discriminate on such grounds in this country, thankfully.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 749 ✭✭✭Bill2673


    I was once turned away from a B&B because of my big nose.........it was humiliating.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 763 ✭✭✭F-Stop


    Hazelmary Bull? Really? No, really?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 471 ✭✭checkyabadself


    I thought cottaging was their thing, never heard of them B&B-ing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,055 ✭✭✭snickerpuss


    bluewolf wrote: »
    They booked it despite knowing this policy?
    Sure, go right ahead, but "we just wanted a relaxing weekend break away"? Political fight more like
    They mean that the owners had been contacted by a group and told this was illegal. There is no indication the gay couple knew this.


  • Posts: 81,308 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Mitchell Handsome Couch


    They mean that the owners had been contacted by a group and told this was illegal. There is no indication the gay couple knew this.
    Yeah but youd think theyd check the website

    I phrased it badly, I just mean if the notice was up there and a gay group had contacted them...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 34,418 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    OisinT wrote: »
    Would they have asked two heterosexual people for proof they were married? I think not.

    The would not allow her brother and his female partner share a room because the were not married.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,861 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

    Barrington 14:04 "Shut the **** up, Leviticus."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    OisinT wrote: »
    Would they have asked two heterosexual people for proof they were married? I think not.

    Apparently they do, the woman who owns the place refused her nephew a room with his girlfriend on the same basis! I had a very similar issue in rural Mayo a few years ago for a wedding! I turned up with my girlfriend and we were looked up and down and given filthy looks when we turned up at the B & B. We couldn't work out what the issue was at all, then the religious statues all over the house and the crucifixes everywhere, we worked out that your wan wasn't happy with giving us a double room when she didn't see wedding rings... Sure weren't we still sticking young girls into Magdalene laundries in the 1980's!?!


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    LBGT/legal discussion/politics/christianity/boards.co.uk forum is that away
    >


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 34,418 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    Apparently they do, the woman who owns the place refused her nephew a room with his girlfriend on the same basis! I had a very similar issue in rural Mayo a few years ago for a wedding! I turned up with my girlfriend and we were looked up and down and given filthy looks when we turned up at the B & B. We couldn't work out what the issue was at all, then the religious statues all over the house and the crucifixes everywhere, we worked out that your wan wasn't happy with giving us a double room when she didn't see wedding rings... Sure weren't we still sticking young girls into Magdalene laundries in the 1980's!?!

    Are you serious, what if you dont wear a wedding ring but are married.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,911 ✭✭✭HellFireClub


    Seaneh wrote: »
    LBGT/legal discussion/politics/christianity/boards.co.uk forum is that away
    >

    There's always one...


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 468 ✭✭J K


    Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."


    mmmmmmmmmmmmm womankind


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."
    Some writings are full of crap and written worse than a Shakespearian play!
    "The Book Of Biggins"


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    the book of biggins is indeed a very good example of something that is written very badly.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,516 ✭✭✭matrim


    Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

    Does that mean that they have to do it standing up or does doggy style count as not lying?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,861 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    matrim wrote: »
    Does that mean that they have to do it standing up or does doggy style count as not lying?

    No. IT IS ABOMINATION!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 749 ✭✭✭Bill2673


    Here's a few more from Leviticus.....they should turn this into a musical.

    [SIZE=-1]"But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an [/SIZE]abomination[SIZE=-1] to you." (Leviticus 11:10) (that is to say, don't eat shrimp or lobster, as they are in same league as same sex coupling - an abomination) (I wonder is shrimp on the menu at this B&B, 'twould be a laugh).[/SIZE]

    [SIZE=-1]"For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus [SIZE=-1]20:9[/SIZE][SIZE=+1]) [/SIZE](that is to say, don't slag off your ma to her face). [/SIZE]

    [SIZE=-1]"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." [/SIZE][SIZE=+1](Leviticus [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]25:44-45[/SIZE][SIZE=+1])[/SIZE]

    "Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard." [SIZE=+1](Leviticus [SIZE=-1]19:27)[/SIZE][/SIZE]


    [SIZE=-1]"...do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." [/SIZE][SIZE=+1](Leviticus [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]19:19[/SIZE][SIZE=+1])[/SIZE]



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,880 ✭✭✭Canis Lupus


    matrim wrote: »
    Does that mean that they have to do it standing up or does doggy style count as not lying?

    I thought it was just about telling the truth.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 301 ✭✭Ellian


    Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

    I think you'll find that's pronounced "abumination"


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭curlzy


    I hate when religious nuts try to instill their beliefs on others. Just because they believe an invisable man in the sky is watching everything they do doesn't mean everyone should be subjected to their wacko notions. I'm delighted for the gay couple, no one should be subjected to this kind of backwards bigotry in this day and age.


Advertisement
Advertisement