![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This, about the Sexual Orientation Regulations, made me really sad. All the examples the opponents of the bill gave, like hoteliers liable to prosecution for refusing a double room to a gay couple, were things that I thought "But that's what I would want to happen!". I think I may be a lefty pinko liberal.
On the other hand, this, about a new random radio station launching in Oxford, sounds quite interesting
On the other hand, this, about a new random radio station launching in Oxford, sounds quite interesting
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 03:18 pm (UTC)From:As for the eggs, now that the age discrimiation act is in force, I wonder if that is strictly legal? After all, they don't refuse pensioners, I assume.
I think with the community centre, I feel that basically, they should have to provide a good reason for refusal which wasn't "we just don't like it". So concern for the fixtures and fittings or uncertainty about insurance position would be potentially valid concerns (at least on an initial application). I would expect them to be upfront with you about those concerns as part of their refusal and if you can address them then they should revisit.
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 03:33 pm (UTC)From:My opinion on the egg situation was that it was silly, but that there should be no law preventing them selling eggs or forcing them to do so.
As for the community centre, what would your thoughts be if the nature of their concerns were "Your activity is violent and unpleasant and upsets us personally. We don't care that you've shown us valid insurance and references and that your activities are legal (we think they should be banned). You're not coming in!"?
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 03:41 pm (UTC)From:On the other hand, I could side with the landlord who threatened to eject you for not buying - after all he's offering the service of a place to drink (or possibly eat) things purchased from him, not a place to sit so that would be at his discretion :)
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 03:55 pm (UTC)From:I think it would be reasonable to ask that you demonstrate that the violent elements of the activity are consensual and within the law
This is, of course, quite reasonable. It would be bizarre for there to be a law to force people to allow others to use their property for breaking the law.
I don't think that gives them the right to prevent you from doing it in a hireable hall they run.
What, then, do you think should happen when we have got to this stage? Should I be permitted to call the authorities and have them allow me to gain entry to the premises by force?
By the way, I picked this example as it is does not involve religion but does involve an activity that many people do have a prejudice against.
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 04:09 pm (UTC)From:No, I'd go for a more administrative solution! I think you should have the right to make a complaint to the authorities and have the hall management prosecuted for refusing to provide you with a service they have previously advertised. I assume this would be punishable by a fine or something of that nature and an order to allow you to hire the premises
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 04:21 pm (UTC)From:It's the "order" that I wonder about, as that would essentially be using the threat of violence to force people to support an activity of which they disapprove (if they don't comply they will have their money taken or will be arrested and jailed). Do you think that at all immoral?
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 04:26 pm (UTC)From:no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 09:35 pm (UTC)From:In the end it will come down to force, for if the state insists that I must use the room and the owners try to prevent me, perhaps with a sit-down strike, then physical force would be required for me to be able to continue. This would make all parties villainous in my opinion.
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 09:52 pm (UTC)From:True. My sympathies would be much more with you and the state than the refuseniks though given this set up.
no subject
Date: January 9th, 2007 10:04 pm (UTC)From: