gay only resort!!! is this legal....??

First topic message reminder :

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

or is it hypocrisy....

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
I think you are missing the point we have queers getting in a hissy fit over bakers not wanting to promote queer ways while there are resorts, hotels and b&b's stating queers only !!!!!!!!!!!!!! HYPOCRISY AT IT'S FINEST...

No that is discrimination, which you miss the difference of.
Would you go on your own to a gay only club or want to?

of course it is hypocrisy but because of your bias you cannot see it.

the discrimination is there regardless of who wants to attend...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

No that is discrimination, which you miss the difference of.
Would you go on your own to a gay only club or want to?

of course it is hypocrisy but because of your bias you cannot see it.

the discrimination is there regardless of who wants to attend...

You need to read back, as I do not favour them, but you are confusing two issues.

What about women only clubs then?


https://www.rawhorizons.co.uk/

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
of course it is hypocrisy but because of your bias you cannot see it.

the discrimination is there regardless of who wants to attend...

You need to read back, as I do not favour them, but you are confusing two issues.

What about women only clubs then?


https://www.rawhorizons.co.uk/

so you admit it is hypocrisy to have gay only hotels and then to target places that do not want to serve queers...

i have no problem with gays having gay only hotels as long as they don't force Christians Muslims or whatever to accept them if they don't want to , if it works for everyone then that's great but it seems gays want it both ways doesn't it .

Vicar of Dibley wrote:i have no problem with gays having gay only hotels as long as they don't force Christians Muslims or whatever to accept them if they don't want to , if it works for everyone then that's great but it seems gays want it both ways doesn't it .

that is equality, well said and to be honest i would rather they slobber over each other in the privacy of their gay clubs and hotels than force their perversion on normal people..

Vicar of Dibley wrote:i have no problem with gays having gay only hotels as long as they don't force Christians Muslims or whatever to accept them if they don't want to , if it works for everyone then that's great but it seems gays want it both ways doesn't it .

I thought Christians accept everyone?
Anyway, you do not have to accept them if you do not want to, but you also have no right to discriminate against them.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:i have no problem with gays having gay only hotels as long as they don't force Christians Muslims or whatever to accept them if they don't want to , if it works for everyone then that's great but it seems gays want it both ways doesn't it .

I thought Christians accept everyone?
Anyway, you do not have to accept them if you do not want to, but you also have no right to discriminate against them.

yet you say gay only hotels etc are not discriminating, you are a hypocrit as we already know...

Jesus did not accept everyone, the bible does not accept everyone, so how do you think Christians should accept everyone...

Vicar of Dibley wrote:i have no problem with gays having gay only hotels as long as they don't force Christians Muslims or whatever to accept them if they don't want to , if it works for everyone then that's great but it seems gays want it both ways doesn't it .

I don't mind. My only objection to the Key West resort is that it looks lovely, and I'm not allowed to go there.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

I thought Christians accept everyone?
Anyway, you do not have to accept them if you do not want to, but you also have no right to discriminate against them.

yet you say gay only hotels etc are not discriminating, you are a hypocrit as we already know...
Never made any such claim
Jesus did not accept everyone, the bible does not accept everyone, so how do you think Christians should accept everyone...

Again I do not approve of such places, which you speak nothing about women only, so are they hypocrites to you also?
Many Christians already accept homosexuals, so the question you need to answer is why you do not?

I think the point that HF is trying to make is that gay people object to discrimination against them, but that they don't mind discriminating against non-gay people.

Of course he's taking a particular example of one hotel, and that doesn't mean that all gay people want to discriminate against non-gay people.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:i have no problem with gays having gay only hotels as long as they don't force Christians Muslims or whatever to accept them if they don't want to , if it works for everyone then that's great but it seems gays want it both ways doesn't it .

I don't mind. My only objection to the Key West resort is that it looks lovely, and I'm not allowed to go there.

It does indeed

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:
yet you say gay only hotels etc are not discriminating, you are a hypocrit as we already know...
Never made any such claim
Jesus did not accept everyone, the bible does not accept everyone, so how do you think Christians should accept everyone...

Again I do not approve of such places, which you speak nothing about women only, so are they hypocrites to you also?
Many Christians already accept homosexuals, so the question you need to answer is why you do not?

so you are saying gay only hotels are discriminating and they are therefore hypocrits .. do you have figures for Christians who accept queers or is that heresay...

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the point that HF is trying to make is that gay people object to discrimination against them, but that they don't mind discriminating against non-gay people.

Of course he's taking a particular example of one hotel, and that doesn't mean that all gay people want to discriminate against non-gay people.

If a homosexual discriminated against you as a Christian they would be as much in the wrong, it works both ways. If you went into a shop and wanted a cake with the Biblical verse on executing homosexuals and they refuse you, as they were homosexuals, they would be discriminating against you, even though such a verse would clearly be insulting to them

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the point that HF is trying to make is that gay people object to discrimination against them, but that they don't mind discriminating against non-gay people.

Of course he's taking a particular example of one hotel, and that doesn't mean that all gay people want to discriminate against non-gay people.

they are the worlds worst hypocrits, they cry wolf at every turn and then discriminate against normal people...

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I think the point that HF is trying to make is that gay people object to discrimination against them, but that they don't mind discriminating against non-gay people.

Of course he's taking a particular example of one hotel, and that doesn't mean that all gay people want to discriminate against non-gay people.

If a homosexual discriminated against you as a Christian they would be as much in the wrong, it works both ways. If you went into a shop and wanted a cake with the Biblical verse on executing homosexuals and they refuse you, as they were homosexuals, they would be discriminating against you, even though such a verse would clearly be insulting to them

I don't think that we hear so much about Christians complaining about discrimination though - generally speaking that is.

I actually wonder if I could sue them for that. I wouldn't ask for such a thing obviously, but I think that might be a problem in the courts as it is insulting to gay people.

The point is that I think a gay person should be able to refuse to decorate a cake with words saying that gay people should be killed.

Raggamuffin wrote:The point is that I think a gay person should be able to refuse to decorate a cake with words saying that gay people should be killed.

as a Christian should have the right to refuse to decorate a cake saying being queer and marrying another queer is ok...

Similarly, if a gay person asked for a cake to be decorated with words slagging off Christians, a Christian should be able to refuse to do it.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

If a homosexual discriminated against you as a Christian they would be as much in the wrong, it works both ways. If you went into a shop and wanted a cake with the Biblical verse on executing homosexuals and they refuse you, as they were homosexuals, they would be discriminating against you, even though such a verse would clearly be insulting to them

I don't think that we hear so much about Christians complaining about discrimination though - generally speaking that is.

I actually wonder if I could sue them for that. I wouldn't ask for such a thing obviously, but I think that might be a problem in the courts as it is insulting to gay people.

Oh there have been a number of cases recently with Christians complaining. If they have a evidence they have been discriminated I will rightly say that they have. I think there was a case here where a health worker was suspended on the claim of harassment and how when she went back she was treated with discrimination. I backed her case which she lost in the tribunal, which I think she will win in the ECHR.

Raggamuffin wrote:Similarly, if a gay person asked for a cake to be decorated with words slagging off Christians, a Christian should be able to refuse to do it.

That could easily be constituted as hate speech, though asking for a biblical verse would be difficult to claim.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:The point is that I think a gay person should be able to refuse to decorate a cake with words saying that gay people should be killed.

as a Christian should have the right to refuse to decorate a cake saying being queer and marrying another queer is ok...

I really don't know. One would have to be inside the head of a person who had very strong beliefs to be able to answer that. I suppose the equivalent to that would be a gay person refusing to decorate a cake with words which glorified God without mentioning gay people.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't think that we hear so much about Christians complaining about discrimination though - generally speaking that is.

I actually wonder if I could sue them for that. I wouldn't ask for such a thing obviously, but I think that might be a problem in the courts as it is insulting to gay people.

Oh there have been a number of cases recently with Christians complaining. If they have a evidence they have been discriminated I will rightly say that they have. I think there was a case here where a health worker was suspended on the claim of harassment and how when she went back she was treated with discrimination. I backed her case which she lost in the tribunal, which I think she will win in the ECHR.

There have been cases, but nowhere near the amount of complaints about discrimination against gay people - IMO.

Was it this case?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32386927

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:


Oh there have been a number of cases recently with Christians complaining. If they have a evidence they have been discriminated I will rightly say that they have. I think there was a case here where a health worker was suspended on the claim of harassment and how when she went back she was treated with discrimination. I backed her case which she lost in the tribunal, which I think she will win in the ECHR.

There have been cases, but nowhere near the amount of complaints about discrimination against gay people - IMO.

Was it this case?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32386927

That is the one Rags

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

There have been cases, but nowhere near the amount of complaints about discrimination against gay people - IMO.

Was it this case?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-32386927

That is the one Rags

Cheers - I'll study it.

The main case which springs to mind is the one about the BA employee who was told to take her cross off. She won her case in the end, which I thought was absolutely right.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:


That is the one Rags

Cheers - I'll study it.

The main case which springs to mind is the one about the BA employee who was told to take her cross off. She won her case in the end, which I thought was absolutely right.

Yeah that was way over the top.

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cheers - I'll study it.

The main case which springs to mind is the one about the BA employee who was told to take her cross off. She won her case in the end, which I thought was absolutely right.

Yeah that was way over the top.

She had to go all the way to the ECHR with it though. It should have been sorted straight away - it was blatant discrimination.

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't mind. My only objection to the Key West resort is that it looks lovely, and I'm not allowed to go there.

It does indeed

We should go there and gatecrash.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

It does indeed

We should go there and gatecrash.

I'll pack my case

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

We should go there and gatecrash.

I'll pack my case

Let's take it over and ban all men.

They may welcome you ladies, mistakenly thinking you are part of the drag act.





Sorry, could not resist....

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:They may welcome you ladies, mistakenly thinking you are part of the drag act.





Sorry, could not resist....

I think at the end of the day, stories like this are about whether it should be legal to have private clubs. And obviously there's no compelling societal interest in preventing private clubs. The U.S. constitution, for example, spells out the right to freedom of association.

I see nothing wrong with people running a resort, or maybe a restaurant or gymnasium, and making its use the privilege of club members exclusively. This sort of thing has been done for a long time, all around the world.

The problem as I see it is when a business owner hangs a sign on their door that says "Open." To me, that says you're open to the public, it's a tacit agreement to do business with the law-abiding public, full stop. Once you've hung that sign I don't think you should have the right to turn anyone away for any reason besides an inability to carry out a request -- as in, we can't do this as quickly as you're asking, we can't make as much of this as you want, etc.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Lucifer Angel of Light wrote:They may welcome you ladies, mistakenly thinking you are part of the drag act.





Sorry, could not resist....

love it

Ben_Reilly wrote:I think at the end of the day, stories like this are about whether it should be legal to have private clubs. And obviously there's no compelling societal interest in preventing private clubs. The U.S. constitution, for example, spells out the right to freedom of association.

I see nothing wrong with people running a resort, or maybe a restaurant or gymnasium, and making its use the privilege of club members exclusively. This sort of thing has been done for a long time, all around the world.

The problem as I see it is when a business owner hangs a sign on their door that says "Open." To me, that says you're open to the public, it's a tacit agreement to do business with the law-abiding public, full stop. Once you've hung that sign I don't think you should have the right to turn anyone away for any reason besides an inability to carry out a request -- as in, we can't do this as quickly as you're asking, we can't make as much of this as you want, etc.

So what you are in effect saying is that if I started a "private club" membership 50p for life membership (included in your first order)

I could then restrict my selling to members only, and chose therfore whatever bias I wanted....

so i could exclude (say) gay or Muslim or christian or whatever

hell I could even make a selling point on that


UH HUH...no thanks.....

darknessss wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:I think at the end of the day, stories like this are about whether it should be legal to have private clubs. And obviously there's no compelling societal interest in preventing private clubs. The U.S. constitution, for example, spells out the right to freedom of association.

I see nothing wrong with people running a resort, or maybe a restaurant or gymnasium, and making its use the privilege of club members exclusively. This sort of thing has been done for a long time, all around the world.

The problem as I see it is when a business owner hangs a sign on their door that says "Open." To me, that says you're open to the public, it's a tacit agreement to do business with the law-abiding public, full stop. Once you've hung that sign I don't think you should have the right to turn anyone away for any reason besides an inability to carry out a request -- as in, we can't do this as quickly as you're asking, we can't make as much of this as you want, etc.

So what you are in effect saying is that if I started a "private club" membership 50p for life membership (included in your first order)

I could then restrict my selling to members only, and chose therfore whatever bias I wanted....

so i could exclude (say) gay or Muslim  or christian or whatever

hell I could even make a selling point on that  


UH HUH...no thanks.....

You already have your own members club:

its just hypocrisy, plain and simple, the queers want more rights...

darknessss wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:I think at the end of the day, stories like this are about whether it should be legal to have private clubs. And obviously there's no compelling societal interest in preventing private clubs. The U.S. constitution, for example, spells out the right to freedom of association.

I see nothing wrong with people running a resort, or maybe a restaurant or gymnasium, and making its use the privilege of club members exclusively. This sort of thing has been done for a long time, all around the world.

The problem as I see it is when a business owner hangs a sign on their door that says "Open." To me, that says you're open to the public, it's a tacit agreement to do business with the law-abiding public, full stop. Once you've hung that sign I don't think you should have the right to turn anyone away for any reason besides an inability to carry out a request -- as in, we can't do this as quickly as you're asking, we can't make as much of this as you want, etc.

So what you are in effect saying is that if I started a "private club" membership 50p for life membership (included in your first order)

I could then restrict my selling to members only, and chose therfore whatever bias I wanted....

so i could exclude (say) gay or Muslim  or christian or whatever

hell I could even make a selling point on that  


UH HUH...no thanks.....

That's exactly what I'm saying. If you don't want to do business with certain members of the public, don't hang an "Open" sign on your business and instead make it a private club with membership criteria.

mmmmm...thats borderline chaos though...

immagine if every business did that...

I suspect actually that doing so might be seen as unlawful at best and illegal at worst......

basically don't be honest..lol

mind you how can you expect queers to play it straight....

darknessss wrote:mmmmm...thats borderline chaos though...

immagine if every business did that...

I suspect actually that doing so might be seen as unlawful at best and illegal at worst......

There's no problem, really, because most businesses are out to make money and you hurt your chances of doing so when you turn away customers when you don't have to.

If you ran a bakery and you got a customer, you'd more than likely just do your best to make the customer happy in the hopes of winning repeat business. Business is usually apolitical.

darknessss wrote:mmmmm...thats borderline chaos though...

immagine if every business did that...

I suspect actually that doing so might be seen as unlawful at best and illegal at worst......

Think about Avon or tupperware parties. They're held in people's private property, and not everyone is automatically invited to the party, right?

I'm just saying that if you own property and you want to retain your authority to decide who can come in and who cannot, don't hang an "open" sign on. Problem solved.

if you don't want to upset the queers lie or hide your business and they call this equality, that's very interesting...

its kinda how the world works

sadly honesty is NOT (very often) the best policy.....

It's not lying. Just don't say you're open to the public if you're really not.

the lie refered to is the "sorry I'm too busy" line

making a "private club " would be tantamount to "hiding" your business.

darknessss wrote:the lie refered to is the "sorry I'm too busy" line

making a "private club " would be tantamount to "hiding" your business.

They don't have to hide it; making a private club isn't inherently dishonest.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:i have no problem with gays having gay only hotels as long as they don't force Christians Muslims or whatever to accept them if they don't want to , if it works for everyone then that's great but it seems gays want it both ways doesn't it .

that is equality, well said and to be honest i would rather they slobber over each other in the privacy of their gay clubs and hotels than force their perversion on normal people..

the difference is in the advertising
IF the cake shop said "Any Hetero-normative decoration of you choice" then well that is the product they are selling but they didn't say that they said "decoration of your choice" so they are discriminating now because they are refusing to sell homosexuals the cake with "decoration of your choice" which is the product they sell.

I don't really agree with gay bars it is still discrimination. i know down here it is under "the management reserves the right to refuse service" which almost all alcohol selling venues have (originally based on stopping drunk/disorderly patrons) and other clubs will refuse you for the shoes or shirt your wearing so much of a muchness

Private gay bars and gay clubs have existed for thousands of years. Mainly in the past they existed to keep their lives a secret to keep religious fanatics from murdering them in the name of God.

HF your homophobia here just further demonstrates your bias on the subjects- terms like shit chute, queer, just show you will attack gay people over anything.

Eilzel wrote:HF your homophobia here just further demonstrates your bias on the subjects- terms like shit chute, queer, just show you will attack gay people over anything.

I also wonder whether people talk like that at his church ...