I take my hat off to these two gentleman. I think we all owe them a debt of gratitude. First for having the courage to take on the bigoted B&B owners.
Second, for the way they conducted themselves throughout the Court case (and before), wherein they were objective and honest and to a point, forgiving of the bigots.
Graceful in victory without sounding smug and arrogant.
And in the face of extreme provocation from the likes of the BNP’s Nick Griffin, unswerving in their courage and even findind time to thank and ackowledge their local police for their efforts.
Do you know what, guys – you’re an example of what can be achieved without resort of inflamatory, nasty, highly emotive language as we’ve seen recently from many of the main stream religions.
Good on you. I hope you inspire many to accept that being gay isn’t about ‘special treatment’, but equality.
I absolutely agree with what you’ve said, Paul. By simply putting it in the past, without the need to extract revenge makes them far bigger than all of the BNP put together.
I will disagree.
When someone does something illegal, it is not a sign or courage, or any other value, to let it all drop.
Charges should be pressed in this case.
Just because they press charges against Griffin doesn’t mean they have to forgo continuing on being gracious and proper. They can continue to be brave, and courageous, and polite, and all that, while working to get Mr. Griffin out of government, and into jail where he belongs.
I agree that it is best to deny the BNP the publicity that they desperately crave.
All very admirable I’m sure, but this reticence will be used by the objectionable BNP as a sign of weakness and will be used to their advantage, I’m quite sure. This sort never know when to leave things go. griffin should face the law like any other criminal and should face the consequences of his actions …..
Possibly, but the only people who would back the BNP on this would back them whatever happened because they are already racist bigots.
tell me, if you will, please where is the sign of weakness you describe?
From where I’m standing these two men took on the bigots, took on the judicary, took on the religious right, took on the religious media and the likes of the Daily Mail and = Won.
In my book, there’s no sign of weakness.
Then along comes Nick Griffin, essentially a nobody – essentially a man with offensive views who couldn’t even manage to get himself arrested at one of his own demonstrations. I have meek gay and lesbian friends who i have stood alongside in Shoreham Harbour during the protests about live animal exports who have gotten themselves arrested as they have stood up to for their beliefs….
And, what has Nick Griffin achieved?
He’s a sad, pathetic looser who has yet to spend as much as a night in a police cell for his views.
In my view, he doesn’t deserve acknowledgement. These two men have risen above his type, and good luck to them.
I’m sad that you can’t see that.
Paul, I think Paddy does not disagree with much of what you said, namely that the two gay men are to be applauded for having done all they have so far. And Paddy is quite right to point out that the bully never recognises the graciousness of the victim: he sees it only as weakness and he will therefore attack again.
BNP are just a sad people who are always ready to angry at someone.
They are fearful of a chainging world because they know they will not be able to live in it without having to change themselves. They love the past where they can remain their cowardly selves.
True, but I’d extend that to say that it applies to everyone I’ve ever known who is politically right-of-centre.
Yes i thought they conducted themselves very well and as a Christian i do not want to be associated with Nick Griffins type of Christianity and we had a lot of discussion around his comments after church service this morning and nobody was at all impressed. No person should be able to deny a public service but people should also have a right to determine who resides under their own roof. But the law has now made its judgement and the appeals process will no doubt be triggered now. This is an emotive subject because we people of religion identify with God in the same way as others identify strongly with sexuality or race. Civility is sometimes lost on both sides and we tend not to notice our own ”bigotry” when we think we are right. I dislike knee jerk comments like Gaystapo and grotesque when applied to gays as much as i dislike bigot and homophobe being applied to us in the Christian community. It dosn’t help. There needs to be more enquiry listening and understanding all round
“No person should be able to deny a public service but people should also have a right to determine who resides under their own roof.”
You are quite right, you silly arse. So if you have random prejudice don’t open a business that involves strangers staying in your house!
No matter how reasonable Christians try to sound they are almost always moronic.
Graham, would you also argue that people who have a strong racist belief (as many Christians did in segregated America) that they should be allowed to open a business and put a ‘no blacks, please’ sign outside their house? Would a shop owner be justified in placing a ‘no asians’ sign outside his shop (which he also lives in and is therefore his ‘home’)? If you stop and think about what you’re saying, you’ll see that you’re suggesting a frightening reality that nobody wants to go back to.
Deep down, however, I suspect you think this should only apply to gays and you’re trying to dress it up in ‘reasonable’ language.
A shop owner would never put a ‘no asians’ sign outside their shop. They wouldn’t be able to operate the till from outside!
“…people of religion identify with God in the same way as others identify strongly with sexuality or race.”
No. You are wrong. A “person of religion” can change their religion, their beliefs, their interpretation of their church’s teaching to suit their needs at any time. So too can religious institutions change their teachings.
A person can not change their ethnicity, their sexuality, their gender identity, their disability. They are set.
@ Graham: ‘people should also have a right to determine who resides under their own roof’.
True. But if you are running a business, you must abide by ALL applicable laws, be it health & safety, taxation and not discriminating. Lets face it…. if I ran a shop and I chose to place a sign in my shop window saying ‘No entry to people of any religion whatsoever’ I would face the consequences. the same applied if I refused to let a woman wearing a niqab or a man wearing a turban get on my bus. I’d soon be sacked. You cannot exclude on the grounds of sexual orientation. Its that simple.
What is the problem of two gay guys? Just what do you find so offensive about that? Honestly, a few of these religions need literally dragging into the 21st Century. You say you don’t like being labelled as a bigot and a homophobe. Well, stop your Christian ‘friends’ from slinging abusive comments at gay guys then. Stop preaching to us in the street or handing out leaflets…
stop saying that being gay is a sin… because it isn’t. I’m perfectly content with my sexuality.
If I was to call for religion to be made illegal, just as folk call for being gay to be made illegal, there would soon be a lot of whinnying from the religious lot.
If you cannot deal with two gay guys… thats you’r problem. Why should gay guys have to change to accept outdated beliefs and ‘traditions’? Its about time that this religious nonsense was brought into the 21st Century… and updated it will be. Thats why we have equality laws, to protect people from blatant discrimination. Now be quiet.
So b and B owners should be allowed to ignore the law and refuse to let gay people stay? What other laws would ‘christian’ B and B owners like to ignore? The hygiene ones? Health and Safety? Can you not see how stupid your argument is? A business is a business and all businesses have to follow the law.
Do you know that Jesus was born to an unmarried mother, which would mean that the Christian owners of this B&B wouldn’t have let either him or in his ‘parents’ in their doors as they are Christians.
Do you know also, Graham that Jesus said keep the Sabbath a holiday – no work, prayer and reflection and as such these supposed Christians are actually going against Christian values by working their B&B on a Sunday. I see they have no problem with this conflict of faith – where receiving paying Guests on a Sunday somehow isn’t a problem for them?
And do you know something else, Graham – and you should know this being a Christian – Jesus said all are welcome in the Lord’s house – the prostitute, the beggar, the thief and the nobleman….
So, we’re all welcome in Jesus’s house, just not one of his follower’s wretched B&Bs.
Don’t hide behind your religion – if you want to be a true Christian then you don’t go round deciding and judging on others, you leave that to the Lord.
I have been writing about this kind of nonsense quite a bit lately. It’s the gay couple who are victims, NOT the owner of B&B! These Christianists are whack jobs. The gap between them and the people who flew airplanes into buildings is paper thin.
Well said. The “nice” religionists are the ones who enable the”nasty” ones to do their work.
The”nice” ones always say, well “real” religionists aren’t like that. Well so do the “nasty” ones say, well those “nice” religionists aren’t proper religionists like us.
It’s just like the “nice” tories who give a home to the “nasty” ones.
I think the call to protest outside somebodys home is a dis-grace, this couple were fighting for a kind of equality that they and many others believe in. But in doing so we must also condemn the hundreds of abusive texts, letters and hate mail that the guest house owners have received over the past two years.
Absolutely right. We dislike hatred and bigotry just as much as they do. It’s not fair that/if they’ve had to tolerate hate mail etc. at the hands of the LGBT community when we are supposed to be setting an example of what it means to be loving to others.
I would NOT say that all of the hate mail and letters etc originated solely from LGBT people. is there any proof of this anyway? Where is the evidence, apart from the ‘good’ words of Suzanne Wilknson? Of course, she wouldn’t lie would she, because god wouldn’t be happy. Some of the letters the B&B may have received will undoubtedly have purported to have come from LGBT people, to discredit the LGBT community as being uncaring, hateful etc…
This is the same as deliberately targeting the LGBT with religious leaflets and abuse, except that in this case, its rather unlikely that LGBT people will do the same to their own community, because we know what its like to be hated.
If these religious folk actually took a moment to realise their actions WILL have repercussions… then perhaps we wouldn’t need to fight for equality laws and bring court cases into the public domain.
Although I respect their decision as it takes a lot to tolerate Nick Griffin, at the same time I think he does have to answer for his actions and words, not just towards them, but on the whole. It seems like the fact that he is an MP lets him get away with being incredibly racist and homophobic to an extent that would have your average joe prosecuted for.
I keep asking myself the question, how did he become an MEP?
I am just wondering what would have happened to Griffin had the two gentlemen been black… Would the authorities have been so forgiving…
BMP Griffin and Mr Black and Mr Morgan: a contrast in intelligence, depth of character and dignity. Well done! Not that the Griffin has enough of any of the above to appreciate the point.
This isn’t America. The victim does not have to “press charges”. If the police think a crime has been committed, then they will prosecute.
When I saw the comments Griffin made on Twitter, I was horrified. I made an online hate crime report to the police. They have since confirmed to me that they are investigating if as a hate crime.
These two gentlemen have suffered enough. They have more than done their part in standing up for our new found rights as gay men and Lesbians. I’d call on the wider community to stand up with them now against Griffin.
This is the answer. They shouldn’t have to press charges. If the law has been broken the police should do it. While we’re at it send him the bill for the protection.
I didn’t know that. This is really good news!!
Interestingly, most of Nick Griffin’s active Twitter followers seem to consider him an irredeemable buffoon: http://geoffsshorts.blogspot.ie/2012/10/nick-griffin-liked-or-loathed.html
I think that these two have acted with dignity throughout the entire affair here but I think that they are wrong in this case and should press for charges. They could still carry on with the dignity that they have already shown so far.
All this will do is make Griffin think he can something similar time and time again.
I would urge the guys to reconsider.
Oh do go away. Homosexuality is fine but, really, these two were not wanted by a private business NOT a public service. They should have gone somewhere else and shut up. Despicable pair FORCING themselves on people who clearly didn’t want them. On a par with homophobia itself.
I dislike anybody-gay or not- who bullies anybody into taking their side; and these two gay men are guilty of just that.
They’ve done the right thing by not pressing charges against Griffin.
sjr, would you also argue that people who have a strong racist belief (as many Christians did in segregated America) that they should be allowed to open a business and put a ‘no blacks, please’ sign outside their house? Were black people ‘despicable’ and ‘forcing themselves’ on racists who did not want them? Were black people ‘bullying’ white people into taking their side?
The whole ‘Christians are being persecuted’ argument really perplexes me – I don’t think you have any idea how humiliating it is to be treated as inferior just for who you are, and denied a service which is warmly available to anyone else. I suspect if I opened up a B&B and refused to serve someone for being Christian, they would have something to say about it. (Although quite frankly I am tempted to put that theory to the test).
Furthermore, do you think Griffin was correct in printing the couple’s address and clearly encouraging others to behave in an intimidating, if not violent, way towards them? Would you condone this sort of behaviour?
Could Nick Griffen be prosecuted under the Data Protection Act, 1984 or could he be prosecuted for making malicious communications, a law which has been used against internet trolls?
Being gay is not the same as being black, being gay is a lifestyle choice. Pure and simple. Nobody is 100% gay or straight.
We do not choose to be gay. We do not choose to be discriminated against. We do not choose to be beaten up. And we do not choose to be treated like criminals in some countries where people like us risk imprisonment or even death just because of what they are. I personally would have liked to be able to have have a wife and children of my own but I have to accept myself for what I am and I am fortunate to live in a country that now generally accepts me for it.
And you would know this because…..?
The only people who have this lifestyle choice are by definition bisexual.
Being gay is not a choice. However, being a Christian is definitely a choice.
Think about it logically, sjr. If being gay was a choice, would you REALLY choose it? Would you really choose bullying, prejudice, physical and verbal abuse – both overt and sly? Would you face the prospect of being thrown out of home, of being beaten up for holding your partner’s hand, of having ‘Christians’ debate your right to be who you are? Would you? Seriously??
Trust me: being gay is not a choice. I spent most of my life trying to push it away, trying to ‘train’ myself to be straight, trying to will it away. Trust me, it’s not possible. Now I am extremely happy in a loving, stable and ordinary relationship with someone I love, rather than leading on, lying to and ultimately abusing the trust of someone of the opposite sex. What seems more Christian to you?
You are proving even more what a complete idiot you are.
Firstly, if you open a hotel or B&B then you MUST comply with the law of the land, in that you CANNOT discriminate and refuse service to someone based on their sexual orientation. The B&B owners did just that and felt the effect of the law. They were at fault, not Mr Black and Mr Morgan.
Secondly, being gay is not a lifestyle choice. I did not chose to be gay. However, you have chosen to be a complete uneducated fool.
Please return yourself to your troll home under the bridge from where you came and leave the rest of us to have civilised debate on matters that concern us.
People have no choice about how they feel. This is true. But they do have a choice about how they act. Nobody HAS to have consensual sex-be they gay or straight. It’s not something that people have no influence over like race. If gay people are going to come out with ‘born this way’ nonsense. So can the religious.
sjr, being gay or bisexual isn’t just about sex. You can be gay and be a virgin, just as you can be straight and be so. People ARE born gay or bisexual just like they’re born straight. Did you make a “lifestyle choice” to be straight (presuming you are)?
“Nobody HAS to have consensual sex-be they gay or straight. It’s not something that people have no influence over like race”
Absolutely right – no-one HAS to have sex. People do, as you say, have an influence over that, BUT they have NO influence over their sexuality. So it is exactly like race. I could equally say that Asian/black/white people don’t have to have sex/have a mortgage/get married to anyone of a different race/ have a passport. Just because they can choose not to do those things doesn’t mean their race is a lifestyle choice. Just because I can choose not to have sex, doesn’t mean my sexuality is a lifestyle choice either.
And why do you care so much? Why on earth is it an issue for you?
Being gay is not a lifestyle choice but if it were I would most definitely choose it especially if it distanced me from you and your ilk.
sjr, yet you carry on proving how foolish you are! No one is born religious. When I was born, my parents had me baptised Roman Catholic, I went to a catholic primary school. We then moved south where the nearest catholic school was too far away so we went to the local primary which was non-denomination. I was then given the choice as to whether I wanted to go to Sunday School and church. I CHOSE not to go, therefore I chose not to be religious. You argument is so deeply flawed, I think that they can see it surfacing somewhere on the other side of the world.
So, if people are born religious, then why do we hear of people who convert to being Muslim or some other religion? Do please enlighten me.
I’ve never been interested in having a relationship with women. It’s never entered my mind at all. Granted yes, I SPOKE to girls at school, but I never had any feelings for girls at all. So, that disproves your inane theory that people choose to be gay. This leads me to ask when did you decide to become straight?
My sexuality-like everybody else’s- depends on circumstances. If all of the opposite sex died out tomorrow, heterosexuals would be indulging in homosexual behaviour with gay men. And if there were only 1 gay man left in the world tomorrow, he’d be having sex with women soon enough. The difference between a heterosexual male and a gay one is 5 pints of lager.
The trouble with you lot is that you have fetishised homosexual behaviour as something that makes you special and worthy of note. The bed and breakfast couple didn’t like the couple’s sexuality. So what? Their choice.
It will soon be compulsory to genuflect to so-called gay people.every time they pass by.
Sjr, just because you are bisexual and closetting part of who you are, it doesn’t mean we all are. I am 100%, completely and totally gay. I would never, ever, ever, ever have sex with a man even if all women died out tomorrow. I certainly could never fall in love with one. Which doesn’t mean I hate men or am a ball buster – I am very fond of my male friends, just not in that way.
Anyway, even if it were the case that gay people could force themselves to be attracted to the opposite sex if they tried hard enough – why on earth SHOULD they? Why should they quell their natural, consensual, desires and live a life of misery? To quell people like you and the imaginary man in the sky? Why on earth people feel it’s more reasonable to believe a book of nosensical fiction than to love a human being of the same sex is beyond me.
I have never asked for special privileges as a gay guy. I do not see myself as above or below anyone else, no matter what their sexual orientation, skin colour, race, what language they speak. I work with a wide range of people and I try to get on with all of them. My sexual orientation is not a topic of conversation with them; if they ask, I will say.
The same would apply if I opened a B&B, did not make mention I was gay and then stopped a Christian couple from staying, they would soon start whinnying. I have never asked for and never will ask for special privileges based on my sexual orientation. All that i ask for is that i am treated equally as anyone else and not discriminated against based on my sexual orientation. We can argue the point until we are blue in the face, but the fact remains, the B&B owner discriminated against Mr Black and Mr Morgan. And that was proved in the court. End of.
“My sexuality-like everybody else’s- depends on circumstances”
No, just because YOU are like that, it doesn’t follow that everyone else is. That’s the mistake straight homophobes make – ‘you’re not like me so you must be wrong’ or ‘i like the opposite sex so you must too’.
If I was the last woman on earth along with one man, I’d never want to sleep with him because I don’t find men physically attractive. If you’re talking about re-populating the Earth, then I’d use AI rather than sleep with him.
You are one unhappy bisexual, it seems to me. Or maybe you don’t even realise/admit your own sexuality?
In law there is no such thing as a ” private ” business. If you offer a service to members of the public, even if its in your own home, such as a B&B or clipping dogs or aroma therapy, then you have to abide by the equality law, no ifs and buts. you seem to be confused byt he term ” public service” which is legaly a service offered usually free by the state, which still is covered by the equality laws.
Call it what you like, sjr, but a business is a business and has to follow the law whether it’s big, small, privately-owned or a massive plc.
The owner of the B&B accepted a deposit for the booking: who exactly was FORCING themselves on whom, would you say?
Pressing charges will merely give Griffin the oxygen of publicity he so craves.
Treet his utterances with the contempt they deserve.
You should see the comments in The Independent story, CI supporters already misrepresenting the facts, as predicted.
Here’s the link. CI supporters are saying the men were simply refused a double bed, as implied by some news reports, but as I recall reports at the time, the men were not even allowed out of their car when they arrived to park, and were turned away. Similarly in the other case, no alternative arrangement was offered, they simply didn’t want a gay couple under their roof.
I’ve just been perusing the Christian Institute facebook page, and think my blood pressure has been set back for good. Tried to resist the urge to comment – knowing it would fall on deaf ears – but I caved in and did. Cue the illogical, hysterical, responses.
Nick Griffen’s rantings has shown us what a complete racist, homophobic buffoon he really is. As far as I know there has been no trouble at Mr. Black and Mr. Morgan’s house yet and anybody who does choose to cause trouble there will probably find themselves chased out by the decent majority.
How magnanimous of them. They’ve shown the bigots who the real ‘christians’ are by turning the other cheek, even if they aren’t believers. The owners of that B&B can learn a lesson from this couple’s brilliant example. They deserve our admiration and respect for taking the higher road because they are decent and honest.
The Judgement is now available online:
OK, having read the judgement, it’s clear in particular that a couple of lies are being put out on the internet:
1) That the gay couple were merely refused a double bed, and refused to have single rooms. – In fact, as with the Preddy case, they were told, (admitted by the defendants) that there were no other rooms available. The Defendants would also have refused them a twin bedded room, i.e. any double room.
2) That the Defendants didn’t allow unmarried heterosexuals to stay. – In fact their evidence confirms that for normal evening bookings like this one, they didn’t ask if straight couples were married, and they did allow them to stay if even they found out they were unmarried; they only turned away straight couples who turned up during the day wanting a place for a bonk.
But all the above is irrelevant ultimately, since the requirement for a couple to be married is one that a gay couple cannot fulfil, and so amounts to direct discrimination and is illegal.
Well I really have to admire these two gentleman because I don’t think I’d have been so easy on this creature. And hats off to the local police for responding so well. I know they are meant too, but we all know how the police can be with things that seem to them very small.
Frankly I don’t think somebody, like the creature (Nick Griffin) should even be allowed to stand for MEP or MPs! This man incites hate etc. He’s anti race, anti gay, anti religion (that’s not his own) anit……….(fill in the blank yourself) probably anti women so how was he allowed to stand?!
“Michael Black and John Morgan…say they will not press for charges against the BNP leader.”
The CPS says “It’s not up to you stop watching so much TV”