I am not sure of what kind of laws they have in Britian protecting business owners but every business I have ever worked for has had the right to refuse service to anyone and not give reason. While I don't know that refusing service to these people is the best way to demonstrate the love of Jesus, clearly their conscience couldn't abide allowing this behavior under their roof. It seems that it should be simpler than that though- if the customer refuses to comply with the policy of the business they should naturally be denied service. Why should a business matter get turned into such a personal and controversial matter?
I agree with Holmse on this one. The equality law does not distinguish between the person and the act. I think unfortunately the judge will take a dim view of this one, although Christians do rightly differentiate between the sinner and their sin.
The Judge of all the earth will present His own verdict in a coming day.
"Mr Dingemans denied that there had been any discrimination on the part of his client, insisting that it was â€śnot the sexual orientation that she objected to but the sexual behaviour"
So she is quite happy that these guys are homosexual, but objects to them doing sex using their particular method??
If we quote "exonerate" "validate" the homosexual as a person who is acceptable, but carries out their sexual conduct in a different way, - which is what identifies them as different in the first place, - and discriminates against them because of the act, then that is double standards.
The idea today that we accept them as people, BUT don't allow them to "marry," the official societal method of cohabitation, is basically discrimination. Its too late to complain now about so called same-sex marriage, the law has accepted them as and who they are, and exonerated them in law to be quote "normal" "acceptable" but different, but free person. Too late iaw the law.
In effect the law has exonerated the 'act' by validating the person type.