Oh, this is a right pain in the bum! After several incidents in which Christians who ran beds and breakfasts were told that they had no right to control who frequented their establishments; to be more precise: even if they only wanted married, heterosexual couples to sleep in their houses their desires were “bigoted” and “illegal”, there is no concern are self-pity because “gay hotels” are now being investigated for discriminating against heterosexual couples. It is also not a stretch to imagine that there will have to be investigations about the rights of women to stay at any establishment they choose are being infringed upon! Is one to infer from this that some rights are more equal than others?
Right, then. I need to hope that no one in San Francisco reads this as I would become an object of ridicule.
Boadicea's Chariot 
crumbs I’d be buggered if I ever stayed in a gay hotel 😉
I think this comes under the heading of “Law of Unintended Consequences”.
The uproar from a certain section of the community about the rights (or rather non-rights) of one section of the community to discriminate was bound, rightly, to lead to an investigation into the rights of any group to discriminate.
I really don’t see that there needs to be a Commission to look into the matter – that smacks of trying to find legal loop-holes in the legislation. Nor do I see that there should be a ‘complaint’ to investigate whether the anti-discrimination laws are being broken – since, clearly, they are.
Occasionally some of these ‘protesters’ should remember the old adage: “Be Careful what you ask for”… sometimes getting what you scream for is not precisely what you wanted.
Boadicea: it is not equal rights which were sought, it was special rights. Living in what could well be described as a particular minority’s Mecca, I have had ample chance to observe actual behaviour as compared to rhetoric. There are a number who simply wish to live in peace and be left alone — they do what they do with whom they please and are content. Others are a bit more open, sometimes too open, but at least abide by a life-and-let-live mentality. Others are quite militant, demanding extra protections and refusing to accept any criticism — not matter how small, or, for that matter, correct. One out of four of the XY variety in this city are HIV positive, if they don’t have AIDS. To say that perhaps certain behaviours should be toned down and better thought through result in screeches and howls of “bigot” and “homophobe”.
I agree with your comment that there should not even be a commission for it. The fact remains that many have a certain disregard for the rights of others. That people are obliged to leave the city during certain times of the year not to be exposed to public sex and other raunchy behaviours should serve as enough evidence to back this up.
Christopher
You are, of course, right. I doubt that any fair minded person would deny the rights of homosexuals, women, minorities and others to have equal rights under the law. What they do object to, and not unreasonably, is where those rights have become law-enforced privileges that are not equally available to all – and thereby ensuring, again, that not everyone is equal under the law. But, it has ever been thus, those with the ‘power’ (in today’s world with words like racist, bigot, homophobe, and sexist) have always sought and gained a privileged position.
I have a great deal of sympathy with your last paragraph. We lived in Sydney for a while – there was a time of year when it most unpleasant to go to the CBD. But, to be honest I feel exactly the same about public displays of any sexual activity.
Boadicea ” …..there was a time of year when it most unpleasant to go to the CBD …. ”
Wouldn’t be that damned “Mardi Gras” parade? 🙂
off topic – put your car under cover, huge hail storm heading towards Brisbane, hail stones as big as Uluru and the Olgas combined. 😦
Had a squiz at the weather radar, Donald – it’s heading straight for us. Thanks for the warning. 🙂
Donald – Now how did you guess that!
Thanks for the warning!
🙂
Boadicea: I also tend to be less than humoured by any overt displays of sexuality. Holding hands and a quick kiss on the cheek doesn’t bother me in the least, regardless of if it is a heterosexual or homosexual couple, but no more than that. More than once men have propositioned me, if not actually tried to fondle me.
The storm had slackened before it reached us, but we did have non-stop thunder for about half-an-hour, which was fun. Just normal heavy-ish rain now.
Looks like a long storm, she stretches all the way to the Alice. Weather boys registered 15,000 lighting strikes.
http://www.weatherzone.com.au/radar/
We Aussies must be special, even our storms are continental in size 🙂
What is sauce for the goose…
There are an abundance of homosexuals in the hospitality industry – the Royal Family employs a large number, I believe, and clearly a number of them make excellent and attentive servants. We overnight at a small hotel on our way south owned by “John and Henry” which is open to all persuasions as far as we can tell from the range of other guests at breakfast. It is their attention to detail and service which persuades us to return, not their own particular sexual preferences. I would be dismayed if they decided to discriminate against heterosexual couples! But those that do, need to feel the full weight of the law applied equally across the board (and Bed), or alternatively the law needs to allow owners to specify whom they may wish to serve. It seems rather odd that a Publican may still choose whom he wishes to serve but a B & B owner may not…
There is a country and western song called ‘Behind Closed Doors’ and that’s how I see things. If you are going to run a guest house or hotel and you are prepared to admit the great unwashed, once the door to the bedroom has shut your guests can do pretty much what they want, providing they make no noise, party to excess or frighten the horses. We don’t need public money spent on this things just to state the bleedin’ obvious.