By: Cahir O'Doherty | Published Wednesday, December 19, 2012, 8:31 AM | Updated Wednesday, December 19, 2012, 8:31 AM
Jim and Mary O'Reilly say they were fined for failing to 'support' gay marriage
Like a lot of people, I sometimes think bigotry seems twice itself when it wears an Irish face.
After all we the Irish were discriminated against for centuries in religious, social, political and even philanthropic contexts, so we ought to have learned about the sting and the reach of it.
We really ought to know the harm and mischief it can do to our neighbors, too.
Not Jim and Mary O'Reilly from Vermont's Wildflower Inn, apparently. In August they settled a lawsuit taken by a gay couple from Brooklyn after their business refused to host their wedding reception as well the wedding reception of two other gay couples.
The O'Reillys agreed to pay a $10,000 civil penalty to the Vermont Human Rights Commission and put $20,000 in a charitable trust. They also agreed they would no longer hold weddings for heterosexual or homosexual couples at the inn.
But did they recognize that discriminating against the gay couple was wrong? Not exactly, if what they did next is any indication.
This week the Irish owners are campaigning on television against same-sex marriage in Maine, even though their previous discrimination cost them $30,000.
'A lesbian couple sued us for not supporting their gay wedding because of our Christian beliefs,' says Jim. 'We had to pay $30,000 and can no longer host any weddings at our inn.'
This is America, Jim and Mary, you are not running a Christian business, you are running a business. If you plan to provide the public with services and profit from the exchange there are good and longstanding laws to prevent you discriminating against who can and can not avail of them.
The people standing in your way are yourselves. In any case gay couples aren't trying to buy your approval, they are hoping to celebrate their union. It's not about you. Really it isn't. They didn't ask, as your TV ad erroneously claims, for you to 'support' their gay wedding, they simply wanted to pay you to host it at your venue, which is quite another thing.
Vermont was the first state to approve civil unions in July of 2000. Maybe the O'Reilly's should start looking for somewhere that's more accommodating to their own fundamentalist beliefs.
THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT IRISH THEY ARE AMERICAN.. THEY SPEAK AMERICAN THEY LOOK AMERICAN AND THEY ACT AMERICAN... SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD NOT HAPPEN OVER HERE IN IRELAND ... I WISH THESE PEOPLE WOULD STOP CALLING THEMSELVES IRISH .... YOUR NOT !! YOUR AMERICAN !!!
eiriamach | Nov 04, 2012, 05:09 PM EST
Jacers has returned, a little late for Halloween haunting, and the pipes, the pipes, are still calling IrelandNorth's neo-con DerryAir back......... @olovely, probably you're too young to remember Jack Benny, but sometimes when I read your comments, the ghost of Jack Benny appears in my mind's eye, his hand slapping his cheek as he exclaims sardonically, "Oh LOVly!" So I wonder whether you meant your screen name to remind us of the original 'great one' of radio/TV comedy. Anyway, it reminds me!
olovely | Oct 31, 2012, 04:23 PM EDT
Buh-bye, IrelandNorth. Don't let your neo-conservative homophobic agenda hit you on the derriere (and please take jacersagian with you into further obscurity).
IrelandNorth | Oct 31, 2012, 06:51 AM EDT
I regret to see that IrishCentral is resorting to censorship of posters who do not share their neo-liberal homosexual agenda. Just when we thogh censorship had ended with Stalin. Time to transfer to a less subjective website!
eiriamach | Oct 29, 2012, 05:10 PM EDT
No Jacers, I do not agree that "owner-occupiers of any dwelling or premises like family hotels and B&B’s, open to the public or private, have the right to decide who should be welcomed within or rejected right out." They may have the legal right, but never the moral right. The USA is full of small, family-run businesses, and although they are exempt from much civil rights law (employers with fewer than 50 employees can discriminate, for example, in hiring), they have no moral right to discriminate. It's wrong, and it's always a perversion of justice that tears the social fabric of the nation, whether the law allows it or not! Discrimination by small businesses forces people who need public accommodations to pay high prices at large hotels and restaurants (whose owners cannot afford to discriminate in hiring or clientele). There is only one question at stake-- and you think the O'Reilly's are right to discriminate, while I think they're absolutely wrong with no justification. One question, two opposed sides. So be it.
Fergananim | Oct 27, 2012, 08:43 PM EDT
I heard what they had to say, but they are not Irish. They're American. Should not the headline at least read (Irish-)American?
jacersagain | Oct 27, 2012, 08:03 PM EDT
(Hoping this gets through… I note that some of my previous posts under this article of Cahir’s have been deleted, probably because they hit the nail on the head against Cahir’s own argument under this headline, which self-centred agenda editorial people are capable of deleting, thus swiping off publication of free speech or writings and the freedom of other readers of ICentral to make up their own minds on what they read… or being denied to read). No, eiriamach, you are clearly wrong – there are always two sides of a coin or story and what you call “only ONE question at stake here” is a poor attempt at misleading most people blessed with Common Sense. Pardon me saying this outright but you have a bloody cheek trying to divert the essence of an argument to your own agenda. Not that I disagree with much of your justice agenda but you must surely see within the part of your brain that screams for common sense that owner-occupiers of any dwelling or premises like family hotels and B&B’s, open to the public or private, have the right to decide who should be welcomed within or rejected right out. American Law is all assed-out on this right to privilege. That privileged right should never be denied to people like Mr. & Mrs. O’Reilly, or to me on my property, or to you on yours.
olovely | Oct 27, 2012, 07:32 PM EDT
Seanmor has just conceded that gay people getting married under federal law will have no affect on heterosexual people getting married. He didn't mean to, but he did.
BrianO | Oct 27, 2012, 02:30 PM EDT
aclu, how can I get them to work for me a white heterosexual male? I could use some cash.
Seanmor | Oct 27, 2012, 01:02 PM EDT
No matter who approves or disaproves of homosexual unions, the fact remains that male-female partnerships are still and always will be the norn, never the exception.
eiriamach | Oct 27, 2012, 09:49 AM EDT
I'm also not done with "lecturing ... using religious references." My right to do so is protected by Amendment One, Article One of the US Constitution. Emma Lazarus, whom I quoted to Jacers on another IC blog, calls Lady Liberty our "Mother of Exiles," likening her to an American patron saint; I'd have to call Jacers' patron saint his "Lady of the Straight and Narrow Minded." Romans 8:19-21 reminds us, "For the creation waits with eager longing" for us to reveal that we are "children of God" who have finally learned mutual respect for each other's liberty. When humanity reaches that point, the Gospel says, creation itself-- the natural and human world we all live within-- "will be set free from its bondage to decay" and reveal the glory of God, flashing forth like freedom itself, "the glorious liberty of the children of God." Y'know what? Americans get a chance to vote for that liberty on Nov. 6! I thank God Jacers can't vote in the USA to limit my liberty or anyone else's.
olovely | Oct 27, 2012, 09:18 AM EDT
Smyrnian, please publish your name and full address and a link to your profile photo. If you're going to offer observations about posters and their motivations it behooves you to start with yourself.
Smyrnian | Oct 27, 2012, 08:52 AM EDT
Just asking; why is Olovely so angry all the time, calling people names, cursing at people and behaving in a very un-Christian like manner while lecturing everyone using religious references? Very odd.
eiriamach | Oct 27, 2012, 07:11 AM EDT
Jacers, there is only ONE question at stake in this discussion: Whether the owners of the business should give equal treatment to the gay couple, in other words, whether they will honor the legal mandate not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. They are not called upon to approve of the couple, to embrace them with Christian love; however, they ARE called upon NOT to reject and exclude them with a judgment on their moral character. In fact, if the O'Reillys were indeed "Christian" as they claim, they would simply leave the judgment of sexual morality to God as scripture advises. You have demonstrated once again that it is impossible for Catholics to do what they claim to do-- to acknowledge the equal moral worth of LGBTs in the eyes of God and, at the same time, to advocate that the law discriminate against LGBTs. To discriminate IS to treat the person as less than equal! Thus your religious position breeds inequity and bigotry by stigmatizing people as unworthy-- that's SINFUL behavior (and hypocrisy)! You, along with Mary and Jim O'Reilly, are in no position to demand that anyone say "sorry, sorry, sorry.” when you do so, you presume on God's judgment and bring down judgment on yourself (Matt 7:1 Sermon on the Mount). The law is not demanding; All it requires is that you treat people equally and keep your moral judgments to yourself--exactly what Christ counseled us all to do.
olovely | Oct 26, 2012, 09:21 PM EDT
Jacersagain you're an awful righteous gobshite. Jesus warned not to condemn the speck in your brothers eye whilst ignoring the beam in your own! Who do you think you are, you pompous sanctimonious holier than thou asshat?
olovely | Oct 26, 2012, 07:44 PM EDT
Possibly because you didn't take the case, ceceann. Or possibly because this is the first time you've ever posted and you suspiciously don't supply the name of this business? Because you made it up?
ceceann | Oct 26, 2012, 01:08 PM EDT
I once tried to rent a room in a B and B in Key West and they told me they only catered to gays. Apparently, they did not approve of my lifestyle but I never saw them chastised in a newspaper article.
lokionline | Oct 26, 2012, 12:54 PM EDT
Point nicely (applying the old fashion meaning of "nicely" here) made Cahir.
All us Irish should look over our shoulders at the history of discrimination associated with our own stories and apply those lessons in our own lives.
hollabackgurl | Oct 26, 2012, 11:12 AM EDT
It's so repulsive to see the Irish reproduce the wrongs that were once directed at them.
Frosty38 | Oct 26, 2012, 10:40 AM EDT
I have the "NO IRISH NEED APPLY"
it set in my kitchen so this another one of those
eiriamach | Oct 26, 2012, 09:28 AM EDT
It's a great disappointment to see presumably adult people citing the catechism as their reason for opposing equal treatment under the law in public accommodations. The catechism is a child's way into religion, a completely didactic approach that will never teach anyone to think critically about moral issues. Both scripture and natural law set conscience and moral autonomy above all self-appointed human moral teachers and 'catechisms.' And both mandate critical thinking about moral questions: "By their fruits you shall know them." The fruits of discrimination are your self-serving, self-deluded comments that claim-- falsely-- that Christianity excludes gays and lesbians. Christianity doesn't exclude, but your intolerance does. Christians must never be slaves to human moral "authorities." They have a duty to exercise the freedom of the children of God to put narrow-minded teachings to natural law tests, such as "created equal," equally "endowed by their Creator" with inalienable rights, and just laws enacted by government "to preserve" equal treatment and to encourage tolerance.
seamus60 | Oct 26, 2012, 08:15 AM EDT
Jetsnoone. With respect maybe the O Riellys should read their catichism again as there`s many worse things in there to complain about. It teach`s us that all the wealth in the world can never have the value of one single life, yet the church sits on vast amounts while children starve to death. In the all though, why give minorities rights if they`re not going to be upheld.
Los Leandros | Oct 26, 2012, 07:22 AM EDT
I dont know about the US, but the Irish State ( in the guise of the Bloood Transfusion Service ) actively discriminates against active homosexuals, by refusing to accept blood donations from that source. Presumably Cahir O'Doherty will take on the Irish state ; or is that a campaign too far. Much easier to take in this couple. Also as far as I'm aware, every US state that has had a popular referendum on the issue, has voted against homosexual marriage. Presumably Mr. O'Doherty would label all these people as bigots ?. Very tolerant.
IrelandNorth | Oct 26, 2012, 06:04 AM EDT
And postscript! Did the gay (sic) couple not see the universal disclaimer in the foyer of the said hostelry: "Management reserve the right to refuse admission!" No offence is intended, so don't take it personally.
olovely | Oct 26, 2012, 12:59 AM EDT
Jetsnoone, the voice of African America, or just a divisive rabble rouser who hates liberals and gays? Hmm, it's hard to tell. Cough.
jetsnoone | Oct 26, 2012, 12:48 AM EDT
Haven't any of you liberal jerks ever read the Catholic catechism? Homosexuality is a serious mortal sin. Rebelforce's sarcasm flys in the face of what most blacks believe == that homosexuality is seriously wrong. They are insulted to have sodomy compared to civil rights.
Rebelforce | Oct 25, 2012, 08:38 PM EDT
If they force businesses to accept gay marriage the next thing is they'll be forcing businesses to accept weddings between whites and negroes. Where does it end?
seamus60 | Oct 25, 2012, 07:18 PM EDT
Ironjustice. You`ve made me feel all paronoid. Me being a man and having these nipples can`t be normal.
hollabackgurl | Oct 25, 2012, 06:41 PM EDT
Constitutional rights protect you from being discriminated against on religious grounds. You should have paid attention in school Seanmor.
Woodman | Oct 25, 2012, 06:39 PM EDT
With this the kind of "discrimination" the gays are "suffering," it is complete and total nonsense to compare themselves to blacks and Irish people who fought off efforts of enslavement and slaughter. Soon the gays will be getting special treatment "affirmative action" when they apply for jobs. Already gays are in public sex education classes talking about their normal life style. And it will get worse and worse as they impose this abomination on the rest of us.
Seanmor | Oct 25, 2012, 06:18 PM EDT
The O'Reilly's did NOT loose their Constitutional rights to religious freedom when they became the owners of the Wildflowser Inn, but they probably hadn't known that the Human rights of same-sex couples takes priority over their religious liberty. Requiring the O'Reilly's to accommodate homosexual couples is like compelling R.C. hostpitals to kill unborn babies.
bob mcbride | Oct 25, 2012, 05:45 PM EDT
I agree with the O'reilly's. They have their rights to practice their religious beliefs. The homosexual couple could,ve went to another flower shop! It does say adam and eve in the bible chair! Not adam and steve. I also don't believe in using taxpayers dollars to have gay pride parades. Quit pushing your homosexual believes down peoples throats and get on with it! Go get married and live a happy life somewhere! Beat it! Maybe the O'reillys should file suit against the homosexual lobby group. Gays are not normal and I will not accept it as normal!
olovely | Oct 25, 2012, 05:40 PM EDT
ANYONE reading your post, iron justice, knows you don't know a whole lot about 'stuff.'
alisaann | Oct 25, 2012, 04:21 PM EDT
they put themselves in the mess their in....they CAN'T blame anyone, but THEMSELVES for NOT being able to host ANY weddings at their business.....and for them to be irish and knowing how it felt to be discriminated against.....if their in the business of making $$$, then gays' money should be just as GOOD as anyone else's.
they make me SICK.
alisa
hollabackgurl | Oct 25, 2012, 03:43 PM EDT
If it quacks like a duck it's a duck. Christ said let him who is without sin cast the first stone, so people who bash gays are not following Christs example and a poor Christians.
eiriamach | Oct 25, 2012, 03:41 PM EDT
"because of our Christian beliefs"? Jim and Mary O'Reilly slander Christianity, which has no "beliefs" that support their discrimination. They have offered no "dissenting view," Smyrnian! They've only tried to give their bigotry a respectable name, and Christians ought to object and call their behavior by its real name.
Smyrnian | Oct 25, 2012, 02:56 PM EDT
Holla - just because someone has a dissenting view does not mean that you hang a label on them. If you wish to argue a particular view then please do so without resorting to labeling; that tactic demeans you and sends the message that you have nothing of value to add.
RedBranch | Oct 25, 2012, 02:41 PM EDT
With a name like O'Reillly they are obviously Protestants, probably 'soupers' and quite possibly Orangemen or Masons.
mayoman | Oct 25, 2012, 02:34 PM EDT
Let's consider the matter if the situation was reversed. Mary O'Reilly travels to visit relatives, and books a room in a "gay-friendly" B&B, and on arrival she is told that there is no room for her in the inn because she's straight! Would O'Reilly be upset? Would she be angry? You bet she would be, and she would have every right to sue against the blatant discrimination levelled against her. So why is it different for gay people? Why is discrimination against them okay? Are they less human than straight people? Are thet second-class citizens? Thank God there are laws on the books that protect us all from this sort of abuse. Yet its really too bad that the O'Reillys feel it necessary to attack Gay Marriage. And its truly unfortunate that they are, like so many other people, cowardly hiding their hate for gay men and women behind their tender "Christian beliefs".
olovely | Oct 25, 2012, 02:28 PM EDT
You have got that exactly backwards, misneac. If the O'Reilly's operate a public business they DON'T get to hand a sign saying no blacks, no gays, no Jews or which ever combination. They're a disgrace to their Irish ancestry.
misneac | Oct 25, 2012, 01:40 PM EDT
So much for the Land of the Free,and the home of the Brave ! The OReillys are the people discriminated against ,they are entitled to run their own business in their own premises any way they wish ! As for the comment about booking a "Travellers " wedding in Ireland ,no problem if they obeyed the law .The proven reality is that they do not,and have created mayhem with damage to property ,and in some instances physical assaults on the proprieter ! Would all these do gooders who pontificate on what others should do ,please look after the social life of the gays and travellers !
hollabackgurl | Oct 25, 2012, 12:43 PM EDT
Endlessly embarrassing to bigots, you mean. You don't have to be anti-Catholic to support full legal equality for gay couples - you just have to have a heart.
Smyrnian | Oct 25, 2012, 12:04 PM EDT
Endless, embarrasing and blatant Irish Central gay advocacy. I am sick of the whole agenda. Get a life IC and spare us you leftist and anti Catholic rhetoric.
BrianO | Oct 25, 2012, 11:42 AM EDT
I am offended by this article. where do I go to sue Cahir and not allow him to write his drivel or make a living.
jamieLM | Oct 25, 2012, 09:27 AM EDT
I'm amazed that it didn't occur to this couple earlier of the possibility that a gay couple might try to book a wedding at their public inn and what the consequences would be if they refused to allow it. When one provides services for pay to the public, that means one can't discriminate against certain groups within the public. Isn't that in "Operating a Public Business For Dummies?"
Springfield9 | Oct 25, 2012, 09:15 AM EDT
If you think being Gay here is a bother ....... Try booking a Traveler wedding anywhere in Ireland!
46 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.STEVENSTAR | Dec 30, 2012, 11:28 AM EST
THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT IRISH THEY ARE AMERICAN.. THEY SPEAK AMERICAN THEY LOOK AMERICAN AND THEY ACT AMERICAN... SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD NOT HAPPEN OVER HERE IN IRELAND ... I WISH THESE PEOPLE WOULD STOP CALLING THEMSELVES IRISH .... YOUR NOT !! YOUR AMERICAN !!!
eiriamach | Nov 04, 2012, 05:09 PM EST
Jacers has returned, a little late for Halloween haunting, and the pipes, the pipes, are still calling IrelandNorth's neo-con DerryAir back......... @olovely, probably you're too young to remember Jack Benny, but sometimes when I read your comments, the ghost of Jack Benny appears in my mind's eye, his hand slapping his cheek as he exclaims sardonically, "Oh LOVly!" So I wonder whether you meant your screen name to remind us of the original 'great one' of radio/TV comedy. Anyway, it reminds me!
olovely | Oct 31, 2012, 04:23 PM EDT
Buh-bye, IrelandNorth. Don't let your neo-conservative homophobic agenda hit you on the derriere (and please take jacersagian with you into further obscurity).
IrelandNorth | Oct 31, 2012, 06:51 AM EDT
I regret to see that IrishCentral is resorting to censorship of posters who do not share their neo-liberal homosexual agenda. Just when we thogh censorship had ended with Stalin. Time to transfer to a less subjective website!
eiriamach | Oct 29, 2012, 05:10 PM EDT
No Jacers, I do not agree that "owner-occupiers of any dwelling or premises like family hotels and B&B’s, open to the public or private, have the right to decide who should be welcomed within or rejected right out." They may have the legal right, but never the moral right. The USA is full of small, family-run businesses, and although they are exempt from much civil rights law (employers with fewer than 50 employees can discriminate, for example, in hiring), they have no moral right to discriminate. It's wrong, and it's always a perversion of justice that tears the social fabric of the nation, whether the law allows it or not! Discrimination by small businesses forces people who need public accommodations to pay high prices at large hotels and restaurants (whose owners cannot afford to discriminate in hiring or clientele). There is only one question at stake-- and you think the O'Reilly's are right to discriminate, while I think they're absolutely wrong with no justification. One question, two opposed sides. So be it.
Fergananim | Oct 27, 2012, 08:43 PM EDT
I heard what they had to say, but they are not Irish. They're American. Should not the headline at least read (Irish-)American?
jacersagain | Oct 27, 2012, 08:03 PM EDT
(Hoping this gets through… I note that some of my previous posts under this article of Cahir’s have been deleted, probably because they hit the nail on the head against Cahir’s own argument under this headline, which self-centred agenda editorial people are capable of deleting, thus swiping off publication of free speech or writings and the freedom of other readers of ICentral to make up their own minds on what they read… or being denied to read). No, eiriamach, you are clearly wrong – there are always two sides of a coin or story and what you call “only ONE question at stake here” is a poor attempt at misleading most people blessed with Common Sense. Pardon me saying this outright but you have a bloody cheek trying to divert the essence of an argument to your own agenda. Not that I disagree with much of your justice agenda but you must surely see within the part of your brain that screams for common sense that owner-occupiers of any dwelling or premises like family hotels and B&B’s, open to the public or private, have the right to decide who should be welcomed within or rejected right out. American Law is all assed-out on this right to privilege. That privileged right should never be denied to people like Mr. & Mrs. O’Reilly, or to me on my property, or to you on yours.
olovely | Oct 27, 2012, 07:32 PM EDT
Seanmor has just conceded that gay people getting married under federal law will have no affect on heterosexual people getting married. He didn't mean to, but he did.
BrianO | Oct 27, 2012, 02:30 PM EDT
aclu, how can I get them to work for me a white heterosexual male? I could use some cash.
Seanmor | Oct 27, 2012, 01:02 PM EDT
No matter who approves or disaproves of homosexual unions, the fact remains that male-female partnerships are still and always will be the norn, never the exception.
eiriamach | Oct 27, 2012, 09:49 AM EDT
I'm also not done with "lecturing ... using religious references." My right to do so is protected by Amendment One, Article One of the US Constitution. Emma Lazarus, whom I quoted to Jacers on another IC blog, calls Lady Liberty our "Mother of Exiles," likening her to an American patron saint; I'd have to call Jacers' patron saint his "Lady of the Straight and Narrow Minded." Romans 8:19-21 reminds us, "For the creation waits with eager longing" for us to reveal that we are "children of God" who have finally learned mutual respect for each other's liberty. When humanity reaches that point, the Gospel says, creation itself-- the natural and human world we all live within-- "will be set free from its bondage to decay" and reveal the glory of God, flashing forth like freedom itself, "the glorious liberty of the children of God." Y'know what? Americans get a chance to vote for that liberty on Nov. 6! I thank God Jacers can't vote in the USA to limit my liberty or anyone else's.
olovely | Oct 27, 2012, 09:18 AM EDT
Smyrnian, please publish your name and full address and a link to your profile photo. If you're going to offer observations about posters and their motivations it behooves you to start with yourself.
Smyrnian | Oct 27, 2012, 08:52 AM EDT
Just asking; why is Olovely so angry all the time, calling people names, cursing at people and behaving in a very un-Christian like manner while lecturing everyone using religious references? Very odd.
eiriamach | Oct 27, 2012, 07:11 AM EDT
Jacers, there is only ONE question at stake in this discussion: Whether the owners of the business should give equal treatment to the gay couple, in other words, whether they will honor the legal mandate not to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. They are not called upon to approve of the couple, to embrace them with Christian love; however, they ARE called upon NOT to reject and exclude them with a judgment on their moral character. In fact, if the O'Reillys were indeed "Christian" as they claim, they would simply leave the judgment of sexual morality to God as scripture advises. You have demonstrated once again that it is impossible for Catholics to do what they claim to do-- to acknowledge the equal moral worth of LGBTs in the eyes of God and, at the same time, to advocate that the law discriminate against LGBTs. To discriminate IS to treat the person as less than equal! Thus your religious position breeds inequity and bigotry by stigmatizing people as unworthy-- that's SINFUL behavior (and hypocrisy)! You, along with Mary and Jim O'Reilly, are in no position to demand that anyone say "sorry, sorry, sorry.” when you do so, you presume on God's judgment and bring down judgment on yourself (Matt 7:1 Sermon on the Mount). The law is not demanding; All it requires is that you treat people equally and keep your moral judgments to yourself--exactly what Christ counseled us all to do.
olovely | Oct 26, 2012, 09:21 PM EDT
Jacersagain you're an awful righteous gobshite. Jesus warned not to condemn the speck in your brothers eye whilst ignoring the beam in your own! Who do you think you are, you pompous sanctimonious holier than thou asshat?
olovely | Oct 26, 2012, 07:44 PM EDT
Possibly because you didn't take the case, ceceann. Or possibly because this is the first time you've ever posted and you suspiciously don't supply the name of this business? Because you made it up?
ceceann | Oct 26, 2012, 01:08 PM EDT
I once tried to rent a room in a B and B in Key West and they told me they only catered to gays. Apparently, they did not approve of my lifestyle but I never saw them chastised in a newspaper article.
lokionline | Oct 26, 2012, 12:54 PM EDT
Point nicely (applying the old fashion meaning of "nicely" here) made Cahir.
All us Irish should look over our shoulders at the history of discrimination associated with our own stories and apply those lessons in our own lives.
hollabackgurl | Oct 26, 2012, 11:12 AM EDT
It's so repulsive to see the Irish reproduce the wrongs that were once directed at them.
Frosty38 | Oct 26, 2012, 10:40 AM EDT
I have the "NO IRISH NEED APPLY" it set in my kitchen so this another one of those
eiriamach | Oct 26, 2012, 09:28 AM EDT
It's a great disappointment to see presumably adult people citing the catechism as their reason for opposing equal treatment under the law in public accommodations. The catechism is a child's way into religion, a completely didactic approach that will never teach anyone to think critically about moral issues. Both scripture and natural law set conscience and moral autonomy above all self-appointed human moral teachers and 'catechisms.' And both mandate critical thinking about moral questions: "By their fruits you shall know them." The fruits of discrimination are your self-serving, self-deluded comments that claim-- falsely-- that Christianity excludes gays and lesbians. Christianity doesn't exclude, but your intolerance does. Christians must never be slaves to human moral "authorities." They have a duty to exercise the freedom of the children of God to put narrow-minded teachings to natural law tests, such as "created equal," equally "endowed by their Creator" with inalienable rights, and just laws enacted by government "to preserve" equal treatment and to encourage tolerance.
seamus60 | Oct 26, 2012, 08:15 AM EDT
Jetsnoone. With respect maybe the O Riellys should read their catichism again as there`s many worse things in there to complain about. It teach`s us that all the wealth in the world can never have the value of one single life, yet the church sits on vast amounts while children starve to death. In the all though, why give minorities rights if they`re not going to be upheld.
Los Leandros | Oct 26, 2012, 07:22 AM EDT
I dont know about the US, but the Irish State ( in the guise of the Bloood Transfusion Service ) actively discriminates against active homosexuals, by refusing to accept blood donations from that source. Presumably Cahir O'Doherty will take on the Irish state ; or is that a campaign too far. Much easier to take in this couple. Also as far as I'm aware, every US state that has had a popular referendum on the issue, has voted against homosexual marriage. Presumably Mr. O'Doherty would label all these people as bigots ?. Very tolerant.
IrelandNorth | Oct 26, 2012, 06:04 AM EDT
And postscript! Did the gay (sic) couple not see the universal disclaimer in the foyer of the said hostelry: "Management reserve the right to refuse admission!" No offence is intended, so don't take it personally.
olovely | Oct 26, 2012, 12:59 AM EDT
Jetsnoone, the voice of African America, or just a divisive rabble rouser who hates liberals and gays? Hmm, it's hard to tell. Cough.
jetsnoone | Oct 26, 2012, 12:48 AM EDT
Haven't any of you liberal jerks ever read the Catholic catechism? Homosexuality is a serious mortal sin. Rebelforce's sarcasm flys in the face of what most blacks believe == that homosexuality is seriously wrong. They are insulted to have sodomy compared to civil rights.
Rebelforce | Oct 25, 2012, 08:38 PM EDT
If they force businesses to accept gay marriage the next thing is they'll be forcing businesses to accept weddings between whites and negroes. Where does it end?
seamus60 | Oct 25, 2012, 07:18 PM EDT
Ironjustice. You`ve made me feel all paronoid. Me being a man and having these nipples can`t be normal.
hollabackgurl | Oct 25, 2012, 06:41 PM EDT
Constitutional rights protect you from being discriminated against on religious grounds. You should have paid attention in school Seanmor.
Woodman | Oct 25, 2012, 06:39 PM EDT
With this the kind of "discrimination" the gays are "suffering," it is complete and total nonsense to compare themselves to blacks and Irish people who fought off efforts of enslavement and slaughter. Soon the gays will be getting special treatment "affirmative action" when they apply for jobs. Already gays are in public sex education classes talking about their normal life style. And it will get worse and worse as they impose this abomination on the rest of us.
Seanmor | Oct 25, 2012, 06:18 PM EDT
The O'Reilly's did NOT loose their Constitutional rights to religious freedom when they became the owners of the Wildflowser Inn, but they probably hadn't known that the Human rights of same-sex couples takes priority over their religious liberty. Requiring the O'Reilly's to accommodate homosexual couples is like compelling R.C. hostpitals to kill unborn babies.
bob mcbride | Oct 25, 2012, 05:45 PM EDT
I agree with the O'reilly's. They have their rights to practice their religious beliefs. The homosexual couple could,ve went to another flower shop! It does say adam and eve in the bible chair! Not adam and steve. I also don't believe in using taxpayers dollars to have gay pride parades. Quit pushing your homosexual believes down peoples throats and get on with it! Go get married and live a happy life somewhere! Beat it! Maybe the O'reillys should file suit against the homosexual lobby group. Gays are not normal and I will not accept it as normal!
olovely | Oct 25, 2012, 05:40 PM EDT
ANYONE reading your post, iron justice, knows you don't know a whole lot about 'stuff.'
alisaann | Oct 25, 2012, 04:21 PM EDT
they put themselves in the mess their in....they CAN'T blame anyone, but THEMSELVES for NOT being able to host ANY weddings at their business.....and for them to be irish and knowing how it felt to be discriminated against.....if their in the business of making $$$, then gays' money should be just as GOOD as anyone else's. they make me SICK. alisa
hollabackgurl | Oct 25, 2012, 03:43 PM EDT
If it quacks like a duck it's a duck. Christ said let him who is without sin cast the first stone, so people who bash gays are not following Christs example and a poor Christians.
eiriamach | Oct 25, 2012, 03:41 PM EDT
"because of our Christian beliefs"? Jim and Mary O'Reilly slander Christianity, which has no "beliefs" that support their discrimination. They have offered no "dissenting view," Smyrnian! They've only tried to give their bigotry a respectable name, and Christians ought to object and call their behavior by its real name.
Smyrnian | Oct 25, 2012, 02:56 PM EDT
Holla - just because someone has a dissenting view does not mean that you hang a label on them. If you wish to argue a particular view then please do so without resorting to labeling; that tactic demeans you and sends the message that you have nothing of value to add.
RedBranch | Oct 25, 2012, 02:41 PM EDT
With a name like O'Reillly they are obviously Protestants, probably 'soupers' and quite possibly Orangemen or Masons.
mayoman | Oct 25, 2012, 02:34 PM EDT
Let's consider the matter if the situation was reversed. Mary O'Reilly travels to visit relatives, and books a room in a "gay-friendly" B&B, and on arrival she is told that there is no room for her in the inn because she's straight! Would O'Reilly be upset? Would she be angry? You bet she would be, and she would have every right to sue against the blatant discrimination levelled against her. So why is it different for gay people? Why is discrimination against them okay? Are they less human than straight people? Are thet second-class citizens? Thank God there are laws on the books that protect us all from this sort of abuse. Yet its really too bad that the O'Reillys feel it necessary to attack Gay Marriage. And its truly unfortunate that they are, like so many other people, cowardly hiding their hate for gay men and women behind their tender "Christian beliefs".
olovely | Oct 25, 2012, 02:28 PM EDT
You have got that exactly backwards, misneac. If the O'Reilly's operate a public business they DON'T get to hand a sign saying no blacks, no gays, no Jews or which ever combination. They're a disgrace to their Irish ancestry.
misneac | Oct 25, 2012, 01:40 PM EDT
So much for the Land of the Free,and the home of the Brave ! The OReillys are the people discriminated against ,they are entitled to run their own business in their own premises any way they wish ! As for the comment about booking a "Travellers " wedding in Ireland ,no problem if they obeyed the law .The proven reality is that they do not,and have created mayhem with damage to property ,and in some instances physical assaults on the proprieter ! Would all these do gooders who pontificate on what others should do ,please look after the social life of the gays and travellers !
hollabackgurl | Oct 25, 2012, 12:43 PM EDT
Endlessly embarrassing to bigots, you mean. You don't have to be anti-Catholic to support full legal equality for gay couples - you just have to have a heart.
Smyrnian | Oct 25, 2012, 12:04 PM EDT
Endless, embarrasing and blatant Irish Central gay advocacy. I am sick of the whole agenda. Get a life IC and spare us you leftist and anti Catholic rhetoric.
BrianO | Oct 25, 2012, 11:42 AM EDT
I am offended by this article. where do I go to sue Cahir and not allow him to write his drivel or make a living.
jamieLM | Oct 25, 2012, 09:27 AM EDT
I'm amazed that it didn't occur to this couple earlier of the possibility that a gay couple might try to book a wedding at their public inn and what the consequences would be if they refused to allow it. When one provides services for pay to the public, that means one can't discriminate against certain groups within the public. Isn't that in "Operating a Public Business For Dummies?"
Springfield9 | Oct 25, 2012, 09:15 AM EDT
If you think being Gay here is a bother ....... Try booking a Traveler wedding anywhere in Ireland!