In his first Diskworld book, Terry Pratchett wrote about how cameras are hypnotic and that people will act in blithering ways as suggested by anyone wielding one. The Daly Mail seems to have this down to an art form. They never miss an opportunity for people who feel wronged to look sad and supposed scofflaws to look happy. They’ve sure as shit got it the wrong way round in this article.
A good thing happened today. A little justice was done. I’m sorry to link to the DM, but I couldn’t resist the sub-head:
Bulls said they thought that any sex outside marriage was 'a sin'
I’m pleased that they asked some bulls, but these ones seem especially judgemental. I grew up on farms and I know what bulls get up to. Animal, mineral, vegetable, they’ll do pretty much anything to anything. I have plenty of stories about having to make repairs after a bull made sweet, sweet love to our garden fence. And they weren’t gentle.
Hypocrites. They must be #FtBulls or somethng.
Anyway, the Christian owners of a B&B who turned away a couple for being the same sex as each other have been told not to be so fucking stupid and fined. This case has been going on for ages and trickling through the various layers of courts as these things do. Finally, they’ve run out of courts and the decision is presumably final: they are guilty of discrimination against this couple and that’s that.
Lady Hale, deputy president of the Supreme Court, said:
Homosexuals can enjoy the same freedom and the same relationships as any others. But we should not under-estimate the continuing legacy of those centuries of discrimination, persecution even, which is still going on in many parts of the world.
Well, yes. Like here, for instance. That was the entire point of the case. I don’t really understand the point of her “but”. But her verdict was certainly right:
Dismissing the appeal, Lady Hale said that the Bulls' decision to deny Mr Preddy and Mr Hall a room was an 'affront to their dignity' and that they should enjoy the right to have a relationship like any other heterosexual couple.
It should be an affront to everyone’s dignity, the Bulls’ included, small-minded, bigoted disgraces that they obviously are. They want to deny certain people rights which means they think of them as less than people. Bulls, don’t do that.
It’s good, though, that the Mail thinks it’s important to inform us the the UK Supreme Court is “the UK's highest court”. I’d never have guessed.
The Bulls’ defence was that they weren’t homophobic. They wouldn’t allow anyone to sleep together under their roof if they weren’t married. This has to be one of the stupidest defences of all time. They weren’t being accused of homophobia (which isn’t a crime) they were being accused of discrimination, which the entire backbone of their defence rested on. I’m not a lawyer but using the actual charge as the mainstay of your defence seems kind of foolish.
We are just ordinary Christians who believe in the importance of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
They can believe in the importance of that tiresome phrase all they like. But that wasn’t even the issue here. The issue was that they wanted to tell gay people they couldn’t be gay near them. It was discrimination and bullying and the Bulls ought to be ashamed of themselves. But they are not. I hope you have your bigotry bingo cards to hand, you’re going to need them.:
Britain ought to be a country of freedom and tolerance, but it seems religious beliefs must play second fiddle to the new orthodoxy of political correctness.
Somehow, we have got to find a way of allowing different beliefs to coexist in our society.
But the judges have sidestepped that big issue, and reinforced the notion that gay rights must trump everything else.
I’m not even going to bother. Pick apart this idiocy yourself if you can be bothered.
Christian Institute spokesman Mike Judge said:
What this case shows is that the powers of political correctness have reached all the way to the top of the judicial tree. So much so that even the Supreme Court dare not say anything against gay rights.
Combine that with gay marriage, and it's a recipe for all sorts of threats to people who believe in traditional marriage.
This ruling is another slap in the face to Christians, and shows that the elite institutions are saturated with a liberal mindset which cares little about religious freedom.
And then he said:
Parliament needs to reform the law to allow a more reasonable approach which balances competing rights.
There are no competing rights. By definition we’re all (within some shared context such as citizenship of the same nation) supposed to have the same rights. That is what a right is. There are no competing rights, just people who decide that others shouldn’t be allowed the same rights they are because they are not proper people.
And it turns out those people are wrong, legally now, as well as in EVERY SINGLE OTHER SENSE.