Homosexual Couple Win B&B Bed Ban Case

[The Matthew Islands]

I can see where they are arguing from, because I think it was a case in 1832 that decided that the legal term for 'marriage' was a union of man or women and how they could claim they don't see a civil partnership as 'marriage'.

Either way it was wrong and the judge made the right call.

[Ceannairceach]

1. You have no evidence.
2. Even if this were true, it wouldn't make the B&B's policy any less discriminatory.
3. How exactly are they "radical homosexuals"?

Your run of the mill homosexual isn't lawyering up when he gets discriminated against for his poor life choices... Those that look to the courts are by the very definition radicals.

"Poor life choices"?
Ignoring that, how is fighting discrimination via the courts radical?

[Angleter]

Your run of the mill homosexual isn't lawyering up when he gets discriminated against for his poor life choices...

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

[North Suran]

Last edited by The Bleeding Roses on Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Look at that, I too can prove absolutely nothing.

I fixed the link... Nothing functional changed (or could change) in a one word request for a source. Suran added the entire bit about the HoL having the capability to legislate after realizing I would (and did) call him on it.

Uh, no. For one thing, my last edit was at the same time that you made your post, so I literally wouldn't have had enough time to do so. What I added was "and the Lords Spiritual don't get to vote on it", after I read what Cosmopoles said. "The House of Lords doesn't tend to make much legislation" had been there from the start - otherwise, my entire post would be a nonsensical "Do a little reading first, champ."

I'm always surprised about how far you'll go in an effort to avoid admitting to being wrong.

[Dregruk]

1. You have no evidence.
2. Even if this were true, it wouldn't make the B&B's policy any less discriminatory.
3. How exactly are they "radical homosexuals"?

Your run of the mill homosexual isn't lawyering up when he gets discriminated against for his poor life choices... Those that look to the courts are by the very definition radicals.

Looks like a success story for legal aid services to me. Discrimination should be challenged whenever possible, that's why we have legislation against it.

[Geniasis]

Oh no! He edited his post as I was writing my reply!

Clearly that's bad for some reason!

[The Bleeding Roses]

Or perhaps... as I suggested... they found that bit and went to that inn looking to stir up some trouble being the radical homosexuals they are?

Or perhaps bigots shouldn't have the right to discriminate against potential clients anyway?

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

[Bottle]

-Because gay sex won't make bay-beez. This is why we also hate infertile couples, women who are past menopause, and anybody who uses contraception, ever.

Whilst I appreciate the whole thing as lulzy, I'll just address this...

Didn't Neil Patrick Harris and his lover have two bae'beez?

No. That's just what the gay-controlled liberal media wants you to think. Gays cannot have children, they can only have teacup poodles.

[Unchecked Expansion]

Or perhaps bigots shouldn't have the right to discriminate against potential clients anyway?

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

Businesses are required to abide by laws. The law says they can't do that

[Bottle]

Or perhaps bigots shouldn't have the right to discriminate against potential clients anyway?

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

1954 called, they want their Jim Crow arguments back.

[Mindhar]

1. You have no evidence.
2. Even if this were true, it wouldn't make the B&B's policy any less discriminatory.
3. How exactly are they "radical homosexuals"?

Your run of the mill homosexual isn't lawyering up when he gets discriminated against for his poor life choices... Those that look to the courts are by the very definition radicals.

Waitwaitwait, you're in law school, planning to be a lawyer, and... you criticise people for hiring lawyers? The people who, basically, will ensure that you have paychecks if you work for a private firm?

Man, seriously, you just get better and better. A parodist couldn't make this shit up if he tried. XD

[GeneralHaNor]

Or perhaps bigots shouldn't have the right to discriminate against potential clients anyway?

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

Exactly
Let the free market weed out bad business practices

[The Bleeding Roses]

Your run of the mill homosexual isn't lawyering up when he gets discriminated against for his poor life choices... Those that look to the courts are by the very definition radicals.

Waitwaitwait, you're in law school, planning to be a lawyer, and... you criticise people for hiring lawyers? The people who, basically, will ensure that you have paychecks if you work for a private firm?

Man, seriously, you just get better and better. A parodist couldn't make this shit up if he tried. XD

There is always two sides to an equation.

[GeneralHaNor]

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

Businesses are required to abide by laws. The law says they can't do that

And how are laws created
but before you answer that
What gives law "Legitimacy"

and while we are here, certain laws aren't worth obeying
Like laws dictating what I can and can't do with my business and property
Unless you lend no credit to the concept of civil disobedience

[Dakini]

Or perhaps bigots shouldn't have the right to discriminate against potential clients anyway?

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

I wonder if you only support this because you know that nobody would discriminate against a cis-straight-white-male like yourself. I suspect yes.

[The Bleeding Roses]

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

Businesses are required to abide by laws. The law says they can't do that

The law is wrong.

[Greed and Death]

I'm a bit torn on this one.

How can it be discrimination if they turn away couples, straight or gay, for not being married?

Then again, because of christians like these ones, gay people can't get married at all.

That was not the issue the court was addressing.

[Bottle]

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

I wonder if you only support this because you know that nobody would discriminate against a cis-straight-white-male like yourself.

Now now, Dakini, we mustn't lie. You don't wonder, any more than I do.

[Mindhar]

Whilst I appreciate the whole thing as lulzy, I'll just address this...

Didn't Neil Patrick Harris and his lover have two bae'beez?

No. That's just what the gay-controlled liberal media wants you to think. Gays cannot have children, they can only have teacup poodles.

They're just flaunting their radical homosexual lifestyle choices in front of everyone's noses. Your run of the mill homosexual doesn't have children, that's a inherently provocative act and therefore the domain of radicals.

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

Exactly
Let the free market weed out bad business practices

This is a tangent, but how is a market that only caters to selected groups to be considered "free"?

[The Bleeding Roses]

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

I wonder if you only support this because you know that nobody would discriminate against a cis-straight-white-male like yourself. I suspect yes.

I have been discriminated against as an affluent white male before... There is a bar down the street that prohibits pastel polo shirts.

[North Suran]

Businesses are required to abide by laws. The law says they can't do that

The law is wrong.

Let's see if that one holds up in court.

[Bottle]

Businesses are required to abide by laws. The law says they can't do that

The law is wrong.

And, as an attorney, you will naturally advise your clients to break the law whenever they believe it is wrong, right?

[Ceannairceach]

Businesses are required to abide by laws. The law says they can't do that

The law is wrong.

No its not.

I can make statements too!

[GeneralHaNor]

Businesses are required to abide by laws. The law says they can't do that

The law is wrong.

A lawyer arguing the fallibility of law
I imagine you will be a defense attorney

I don't know whether to applaud or shun you
Either way I might disgust myself

They are right
No Parodist could make this shit up.

[Tekania]

Or perhaps bigots shouldn't have the right to discriminate against potential clients anyway?

It's their property. If they want to lose business that should be their choice, gay, straight, black, red, tan, male, female, midget, so on.

They market their product out to the general public, they have to abide by the general public's rules.... They are most free to do what-ever they want to with their property, except whereas they want to transact deals with members of the public, if they don't abide by said, we deprive them of their privileged to transact with the public.