This is my reaction to this story.
First of all if I had a hotel, which I haven't, I would not care whether a same sex couple using my establishment was gay or straight. What they do in the privacy of their bedroom is no concern of mine.
Secondly I would not stay in a hotel that advertised itself as a 'gay hotel'. I wouldn't have a problem with a hotel advertising itself as such, I would just prefer not to stay there. Similarly I would prefer not to stay at a hotel that described itself as a 'christian hotel', despite being a practising Roman Catholic. Both designations imply to me establishlishments whose owners are so obsessed with one aspect of their lives that they forget that they are actually a plain old hotel and would probably bore me to death within minutes.
But I see no reason why christians can't refuse to accomodate gay couples or why gay hotels shouldn't be allowed to refuse heterosexual couples accomodation. I wouldn't stay in a hotel where people of whatever persuasion or belief were banned, but it should be the decision of the owners and the state should keep out.
1 comment:
Pretty much nails it - the point about people who define their lives by one aspect of it is a very profound one - this is usually where narrow-mindedness and bigotry come to the fore, whereas the rest of us just think 'what the hey'.
But you're right - narrow-mindedness and bigotry should not, in isolation, be against the law or become the business of the state.
Post a Comment