God and Gay

[Ray]

Gay rights laws challenge fails
Houses of Parliament

The rules force a choice between church and state, peers heard
New rules outlawing businesses from discriminating against homosexuals have been upheld in the House of Lords.

A challenge led by Lord Morrow of the Democratic Unionist Party failed by a margin of three to one.

He had argued that the rules forced people to choose between obedience to God and obedience to the state.

But Northern Ireland Minister Lord Rooker said it would be "quite wrong" to elevate the rights of one group above those of another.

Lord Morrow's call to annul the regulations, which have applied in Northern Ireland since 1 January and are due to be implemented across the UK by April, was defeated by 199 votes to 68.

The Sexual Orientation Regulations have been criticised by some religious groups who say people will not be allowed to act according to faith.


Christians...cannot and must not be forced to actively condone and promote sexual practices which the Bible teaches are wrong

Hundreds of Christians demonstrated outside Parliament, but gay rights groups say no mainstream religious groups supported the protest.

Critics say the new rules mean hotels cannot refuse to provide rooms for gay couples, and religious groups would be obliged to rent out halls for "gay wedding" receptions.

They also argue a Christian, Jewish or Muslim printer could be forced to print a flyer for a gay night club, or a teacher would have to break the law to promote heterosexual marriage over homosexual civil partnership.

Tory peers were allowed a free vote but the Liberal Democrats supported the government, whose Labour supporters were whipped to attend and vote.

'Obedience'

Lord Morrow told peers: "The regulations make it possible for homosexual activists to sue people who disagree with a homosexual lifestyle because of their religious beliefs.

"They require religious organisations to choose between obedience to God and obedience to the state."

He added: "The regulations threaten to override the conscience and free speech of Christians and others who object to homosexual practice."


Conservative Lord Tebbit said: "Black is about being. Sexual orientation is about being.

"And we would not wish to discriminate against people for being black nor on grounds of their sexual orientation.

"The concerns which are being expressed this evening are primarily about sodomy rather than about sexual orientation - that is doing, not being."


But Labour's Lord Smith said: "I am somewhat puzzled by the arguments that have been advanced.

"It seems to me, in my simplistic way, that what they (the opponents of the regulations) are arguing for is quite simply the right to discriminate and the right to harass.

"And those arguments are being made in the name of Christianity."

'Fence in behaviour'

One of those taking part in the demonstration outside Parliament, Ralph Brockman, a Baptist from London, told the BBC: "I'm concerned that the Biblical laws should be upheld.

"People may have different orientations but we need to have laws that will fence in our behaviour, as it were."

John Studley, a Christian from London, said: "This government is placing sexual rights over religious rights."

But Neil Partridge, a gay Christian man, said: "Everyone has a right to their faith but is it fair to say to someone 'you can't share a bed in our hotel because you are gay'.

"A hotel is a business, surely. I just think some of the people at this demonstration need to listen to the other side of the argument."

He added: "Recently British Airways was criticised for not allowing staff to wear crucifixes and now some Christians are advocating this policy. I think the recent law is a good thing."

Supporters of the regulations say they simply extend to gay people the same rights that had been granted to people of different faiths in 1998.

A High Court judicial review against the regulations in Northern Ireland, brought by the Christian Institute, will be heard in March.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6243323.stm

What have you to say?

What is more important?

Religious texts or Being what you are?

Paradoxical!

Can you be denied hotel room because you are gay or because you are coc-keyed and hence may dirty the bathroom floor?

Have your say, all of you...the straight, the gay and the happy!

[Asim Aquil]

I think if the business is private it should have the right deny anyone service. Although I don't see a private business making this financial suicide. Maybe a small motel.

Religious groups defy, deny and reject homosexuals. They cannot be FORCED to promote and help homosexuals be homosexual. If no one's forcing homosexuals to be straight, or work with straight people... no one should force the straight people to work with them.

[Ray]

Business is private.

However, it functions as per the law of the land.

Discrimination is against the law of any land.

Therefore, should gays be prevented from finding accomodation?

Is there any rule against two men/ women staying in one double bedded room to save on the expenses?

The backpackers will have a real hard time if it were so!

[Asim Aquil]

Business is private.

However, it functions as per the law of the land.

Discrimination is against the law of any land.

Therefore, should gays be prevented from finding accomodation?

Is there any rule against two men/ women staying in one double bedded room to save on the expenses?

The backpackers will have a real hard time if it were so!

hmmm I think they can without giving a reason even. I've seen many diners in America which have signs like "We reserve the right to not serve anyone".

[Ray]

I have also heard that in the US they sue at the drop of a hat! ;)

[bonehead]

I have also heard that in the US they sue at the drop of a hat! ;)

Too generous Ray. We do not need the hat to drop

I believe Colorado passed some anti-gay measure a few years ago and all the GALA crowd had hissy fits and swore they would boycott, cost the state money, etc,etc. Ultimately the state made more money as others supported the will of the people and tourism/convention money poured into the state.

If forced to make the decision, for me it would be a no brainer, I would choose God and whatever happens happens. I do not have to hate the person, only their actions. What bothers me the most is the drive of homosexuals to legitimize their behavior and agendas.it is possible to live one'a existance without constantly making issues of sexual orientation.
Two guys/gals traveling should be able to rent a one bed hotel without anyone making an issue out of it, but too many homosexuals have the in-your-face attitude and are constantly trying to legitimize a behavior that they know makes the general population sick to their stomach. Are there any heterosexual pride rallys/parades? Generally no. that is because that is normal and how we are supposed to be. Therefore, making the general population choose between God, or supporting a behavior they feel is wrong, will only bring a backlash to the GALA community.

Never underestimate the GALA community as they have retained many "good" lawyers, they have the money to fund ther agenda, and they have the will to see their cause to the end.

[brokensickle]

On this point I find myself in agreement.

I think if the business is private it should have the right deny anyone service. Although I don't see a private business making this financial suicide. Maybe a small motel.

Religious groups defy, deny and reject homosexuals. They cannot be FORCED to promote and help homosexuals be homosexual. If no one's forcing homosexuals to be straight, or work with straight people... no one should force the straight people to work with them.

The homosexuals try to push their way into institutions that promote a strait lifestyle, I.E. Boy Scouts. And who is taking away freedom here. It would seem the homosexuals are taking away the freedom of strait people, religious people, and private business to conduct themselves in a manner that they seem fit. They are trying to push their views on other people.
If the boy scouts are a strait organization then the homosexuals need not apply, and should not. They can go start their own organization although
not many would join. The whole point of the Gay movement is to destroy strait institutions in order to give birth to more immoral behavior; this is how homosexuality gets around nature to procreate. They use other peoples children. Accept for by the grace of God their minds are seared. Some repent.
Just stop recruiting other peoples children for future homo-generation.

IVAN


Ivan

[brokensickle]

They are in your face about it. There's the problem.

Business is private.

However, it functions as per the law of the land.

Discrimination is against the law of any land.

Therefore, should gays be prevented from finding accomodation?

Is there any rule against two men/ women staying in one double bedded room to save on the expenses?

The backpackers will have a real hard time if it were so!

I have stayed in rooms with other men when on a trip to save money and have never been bothered by management about it. NEVER. The problem comes when the homosexual is in their face about their perversion. There are people of every stripe that own hotels and their prime concern in most cases is providing a service for a fee. But most of those people have specific values and the law should allow them to discriminate in the area of what would be considered moral. Besides if they discriminate they lose business and if they discriminate to much they will not stay business long. The homosexual could open his own hotel and cater to homosexuals. I don't want to stay in a hotel where people have been playing but darts with pee sticks. That's disgusting and violates the rules for poop in a room and where it might be found. Poop is for the toilet.:) So you could look at the aversion as quality control by the owner of the establishment.


IVAN

[Asim Aquil]

I wouldn't agree that the whole point of the gay movement is to destroy straight institutions, but this particular measure sure does. This particular measure takes away some freedom from the straight people to the gay people.

[THL]

I dont see where a hotel would want to deny a gay couple a room. Imagine that information coming out in the gay communities. That hotel would be blackballed by every gay man and lesbian woman from Ellen Degeneres to RuPaul and those in between. Then the human rights activists would get ahold of it. It would not be in their best interest unless that gay couple were causing a ruckus. In that case, any couple should be denied or evicted from the room; gay, straight or just plain happy.

As for a church being forced to rent halls for gay receptions....that is not right. Next they would require Christian churches to allow Paganists to rent the halls for animal sacrifice just to be fair and just to all.




EDIT: I just realized that the title of this thread is GOD and Gay....I honestly thought it said GOOD and Gay when I responded. I need to go back to sleep I think.

[omon]

my former boss was gay, but not the one that tells everyone about it, i had no idea about it untill someone told me,everyone loved him, especially girls, he made everyone happy at work, he was a real leader, there are diferent kinds of gays, as i've learned.
i say let them be what they are, most of them cool, those who are not cool, i choose to ignore rather than have anything against them.

[Ray]

I know a girl whose boss (a man) was gay.

Her husband was firing her since she was not getting a promotion and told her to try harder at work.

The girl turned coy and whispered to her husband, "Why don't you help me? Why don't you go and sleep with my boss!" ;) :)

[Debbie]

I was taking a sociology class in college a few years back and the topic of homosexuality came forward. One married couple in the class threw the largest hissy fit ever - I am not kidding. He saying that homosexuality was wrong period that it wasn't natural and she sat there quoting the bible. For an hour this "discussion" went on, ending with these two dropping from the class purely due to the subject matter. There are strong opinions on this subject no matter what side of the fence one chooses to be on. The fact of what is socially right and socially wrong permeates the issue. For me - there isn't a gay person that I can say I've ever met I've liked except for one and he never came out the closet officially.

[Asim Aquil]

I know a girl whose boss (a man) was gay.

Her husband was firing her since she was not getting a promotion and told her to try harder at work.

The girl turned coy and whispered to her husband, "Why don't you help me? Why don't you go and sleep with my boss!" ;) :)

Ah women... Now she'd never say that if her boss was a woman too.

[THL]

Ah women... Now she'd never say that if her boss was a woman too.

Maybe she would if her boss were a lesbian. ;)