Hamilton Princess: “We Cannot Accept Booking”

November 25, 2015

[Updated with group's response] The Hamilton Princess has confirmed that they will not be accepting the booking for the forums on same sex marriage held by the “Concerned Citizens of Bermuda” group, saying that the hotel’s policy is “to celebrate diversity in all its forms.”

Allan Federer, General Manager of the Hamilton Princess, told Bernews, “We were not advised what the nature of the booking was,” explaining that it was originally booked by an organisation with a different name.

“They have not officially signed a contract and no money has changed hands, so we advised them that we cannot accept the booking,” Mr Federer said. “The Hamilton Princess’ policy is to celebrate diversity in all its forms, so we advised the organisation that we cannot take their booking.”

Fairmont Hamilton Princess Bermuda, April 29 2015-22

According to yesterday’s press statement from the group, the forums, which were originally scheduled for Tuesday, December 1 and Wednesday, December 2, were “part of their ongoing initiative” to ensure that marriage in Bermuda remains a “special union between a man and a woman.”

The group said, “As part of their ongoing initiative to ensure that marriage in Bermuda remains defined and upheld as a special union between a man and a woman, Concerned Citizens of Bermuda announced today that Dr. Ryan T. Anderson will present two free public forums on Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 7pm – 8:30pm and Wednesday, December 2, 2015 at 7pm – 8:30pm at Hamilton Princess Hotel.”

“He will address the topic ‘What is Marriage and Why Marriage Matters?’ He will present a public case for marriage between a man and a woman along with answering questions asked by the public in the topic,” the group said.

Update 4.06pm: The group that is holding the meetings issued a response saying, “We have been informed that the Hamilton Princess & Beach Club [Hamilton Princess] has refused to provide Preserve Marriage goods and services on the basis of the Hamilton Princess’ policy to “celebrate diversity in all its forms”.

“Diversity is defined as ‘the quality or state of having many different forms, types, and ideas.’ The public presentation that Dr. Ryan Anderson usually presents is not based on arguments founded in morality, theology nor tradition. Our group is disappointed by Hamilton Princess’ decision and will seek appropriate redress in the immediate future.

“It is unfortunate the Dr. Ryan’s views were invited and acceptable in the U.S. Supreme Court and major universities, but apparently unacceptable for the Hamilton Princess.

“The new venue for the public forums on December 1 and 2 at 7pm will be the New Testament Church of God, Heritage Worship Center, 59 Dundonald Street, Hamilton.

“The public is invited to this respectful presentation, which will include a period for questions and answers. This will be conducted in a manner, which respects all perspectives as any form of derogatory remarks or comments will not be tolerated from any side.

The group said “in light of a particular portion” of the statement from Hamilton Princess an “issue must be addressed,” saying “Hamilton Princess was fully informed that the venue and arrangements were being made for and on behalf of Preserve Marriage.

“Hamilton Princess never asked Preserve Marriage to disclose the nature of the meeting that would take place, which is a civil presentation of Why Marriage Matters. All questions were answered truthfully and fully.

“Availability was confirmed and then the process later discontinued by the General Manager. We were shocked by the representations made by Hamilton Princess to the contrary and will be taking this serious misrepresentation of the facts up with the General Management directly.”

Dr. Melvyn Bassett, spokesperson for Concerned Citizens of Bermuda states, “We are highly disappointed that the management of the Hamilton Princess & Beach Club did not take leadership in this matter.

“Appropriate leadership would have been to send a message to the public stating that because they uphold diversity, they will allow this event as surely all hotels have had other forums and events in which speeches or debates are held with various opinions without banning goods and services.

“At the same time they have disregarded the business that citizens of Bermuda who are in favor of the current definition of marriage bring to the hotel industry.

“It is our hope that this discriminatory ban will be lifted and that Hamilton Princess will exercise leadership for the community rather than operating under the false idea that banning a presentation results in upholding diversity, when in reality it violates the definition and practice of diversity in every form.”

Share via email

Read More About

Category: All, News

Comments (276)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Vulcan Trash Cleaner says:

    LMBO !!!

    • Smart business move, knowing the wealth of clientele that would get offended.

      • hmmm says:

        I think almost every guest would be offended at hotel booking of a discrimination rally. Wouldn’t you be offended at a discrimination rally.

      • jt says:

        Maybe Liberty Theatre is available. You can use your air miles from the last lecture there.

        • Thank God Black people in this island have a place to promote our interest.

          • Ash says:

            Don’t brand an enter race has supporting this crap. It’s not black people who support this, it’s ignorant people. Ignorant people come in all colors. They even have limited edition ignorant people.

      • What would be more interesting is, if the homosexual community wanted to put on a similar event, to try and give people a better understanding of their life style and who they are, would we have the same response, firstly from the hotel management and then from the bloggers here on bernews.

        • Truth (Original) says:

          Equally as interesting is the assertion that “diversity” is understood to mean everyone who agrees with each other.

          If HP were truly interested in “celebrating diversity in all its forms” that would, of necessity, include those who oppose same sex marriage.

          That’s what real inclusion looks like.

          This is a pander and lacks any real moral courage.

        • Mike Hind says:

          The difference is: the group you’re talking about isn’t promoting the denial of rights and privileges to a group of people.

          There isn’t equivalence

        • Vivienne says:

          Sharing a lifestyle is not the same as holding a forum that discriminates against equal rights for human beings. I admire the Hamilton Princess for making a business decision to not allow such a forum. How refreshing to know that for once money wasn’t the driving factor …..

        • Ash says:

          You’re trying to compare apples and oranges. You’re trying to compare hate and understanding. These people are hating and society has no tolerance for hate.

      • Me says:

        Actually ou will find that close mindedness and ignorance are more prevalent in the lower income brackets, maybe due to a lack of quality education and cultural exposure. This is not the target market of a high end hotel so…. Be offended and continue to be unable to afford it anyway?

      • Me says:

        Actually you will find that blind ignorance of those who would be offended is more prevalent in the lower income brackets, maybe due to a lack of quality education and cultural exposure. This is not the target market of a high end hotel so…. Be offended and continue to be unable to afford it anyway? No real business lost.

    • Daylilly says:

      The Hamilton Princess cancelled the event for FEAR of the infamous “hate” label…That label is a powerful weapon and the proponents of the SSM agenda wield their weaponry very well…

      So I guess discriminated, disenfranchised and marginalized are not the correct terms to describe proponents of the SSM agenda… It is instead the terms used to describe anyone who stands against their agenda.

      The hotel cancelled an event that was neither illegal or unethical and in doing so, enacted another form of discrimination and censorship.

      • Mike Hind says:

        Repeating the same false message over and over isn’t going to make it true,

        Pretending that opponents of marriage equality are the victims is completely dishonest, as is rewriting the reality of this situation.

      • bluwater says:

        HP has supported diversity, for-eva. Do some homework!

  2. SANDGROWNAN says:

    Bravo Hamilton Princess!

    Now OBA, step up and do the right thing.

    • Jones says:

      The oba is not worried about your vote. They know you’re one of the loyal dumb sheep. They also know what segment of the population they need to convince and it’s not you! That’s why it will not pass before the 2017 election. They’ll find some excuse to postpone it, and you sheep will believe the excuse, because that is what sheep do.

      • mixitup says:

        My morning laugh!! Soo true.

      • SANDGROWNAN says:

        Political expediency is driving the OBA on this one, whereas the PLP are driven by good old fashioned bigotry.

        Oh, and you’re an idiot.

      • jussayin says:

        Both Political parties are not who we would like it’s the fact that one sunk us in a whole so deep we needed another to try and find a way out. A lot of us voted OBA because it’s the only other option. What you call “sheep” are some of you PLP voters who think that they can pull us back out of the whole when they will only dig it deeper. Wake up ppl it’s not about the party in the power it’s about us the people black, white, green who cares get grip.

        • jussayin says:

          *hole

        • Kevin says:

          What you call “A lot” the Old Bat Association OBA only won by a few votes. Another…

          • Kevin says:

            .idiotic sheep!

            • just wondering says:

              strange comment to make when the PLP stated – “WE had to deceive you” in order to win the election – and yet you still vote for a party that admits that- I just wonder who the sheep are?

            • backakillme says:

              why didn’t the PLP turn out to vote again ?

            • jussayin says:

              You mad bro? I’m just telling you how it is. Yes, a lot of ppl voted for the OBA, and a lot of ppl voted for the PLP. Does that make you feel better Kevin? And “Old Bat Association”? You can do better than that. Blind leading the Blind.

  3. BRAVO indeed.
    Thanks HP&BC for your leadership.

    • Sickofantz says:

      Well done Mr Federer. I for one have decided to go for Tea at the Hamilton Princess tomorrow to sample their excellent and recently returned tea and to celebrate their wonderful decision.

  4. jim bob says:

    What is wrong with people holding a forum on keeping marriage between man and woman the same way that forums will be held on legalizing same sex marriage?

    • Mike Hind says:

      Easy.
      The first group is looking to continue denying equal rights to a group of our fellow citizens using dishonest, unfair and false arguments.
      The second is looking to promote equal rights.

      There’s a big difference.

      • Well said Uncle Elvis !

        This is leadership:
        Mr Federer said, “The Hamilton Princess’ policy is to celebrate diversity in all its forms, so we advised the organisation that we cannot take their booking.”

      • Quinton Berkley Butterfield says:

        Not to mention they LIED about what their intentions were…

      • Spit Bouy says:

        @ Mike Hind,

        Yup.

    • serioulsy..... says:

      one is discrimination, and one is not.

    • smh says:

      The Forum should take hp to court for discrimination. Oh and HP should put a no straight ppl allowed sign on the front door of the Hotel!

      • Mike Hind says:

        This is nonsense. Childish lashing out.
        You can do better than this.

        • Nanny Pat says:

          No, he has proven time and time again that he cannot do better than that. High school dropout – “he don’t got much smarts.”

    • Vivienne says:

      A ‘keeping marriage between a man and woman’ forum, discriminates against same sex partners. A ‘same sex marriage’ forum, are fighting to change the law that denies them the right to marry whom they love, they are not discriminating against anyone……

  5. Billy de Kidd says:

    “The Hamilton Princess’ policy is to celebrate diversity in all its forms”…. Bermp bermp!!!
    I support this decision :-)

  6. NCM says:

    Awesome! No need to provide a venue for these people to perpetuate their bigotry and intolerance. Why don’t they hold it at a church hall that shares their myopic view of the world.

  7. Springheeled Jack says:

    When gay marriage became the law of the land in the US, Christian bakers were successfully sued, fined and put out of business for refusing to bake a cake for the happy couple. Instead of going elsewhere, they sued and won.

    Gay marriage is not the law of the land here in Bermuda. Traditional marriage is, so the leaders of this conference should sue the Hamilton Princess for refusing to take their booking and force them to hold their conference, rather than telling them to go elsewhere. What’s good for the goose…

    But, of course, the Diversity Movement will practice double-standards and refuse to appreciate the logic, because they are acting with a mob mentality in agitating against marriage.

    • Rhonnie aka blue familiar says:

      The ‘diversity group’ is not against marriage, were more for it than those who want to limit who can get married.

    • hilarious says:

      You, Jack, are HILARIOUS! The venue has the right to refuse anyone it wishes.

      I want to know, why does Cornerstone go around setting up these things and then refusing to take responsibility?

      Its comical at this stage!!!

      Just give everyone the right to marriage. No referendum, its none of your business.

      • PWH says:

        Amazing to read that “a venue has the right to refuse anyone it wishes”, so when a venue refuses a LGBT event will you have the same happy attitude??

        • Mike Hind says:

          This point has been discussed and you’re wrong.
          There isn’t a comparison, as LGBT groups aren’t promoting the denial of rights to a group of people.

          There’s a big difference.

          • Joe says:

            “LGBT groups aren’t promoting the denial of rights ”

            No youre just trying to change the foundational definition of society for everyone … whether they like it or not.

            • Mike Hind says:

              Nope. Not true. That is hyperbolic misinformation.

              This will not affect everyone. Just the folks it will benefit.

              And, even if what you say is true, so what? The definition of marriage has been changed many, many times. This isn’t a bad thing.

    • Mike Hind says:

      The bakers were successfully sued because they broke the law.
      What they did was against the law.

      What the Princess has done isn’t.

      • Actually! says:

        Can it be argued that this group was discriminated against because of their religious views against same sex marriage? If so, then denying them the right to book their forum could amount to breaking the law – discrimination on grounds of religion/religious beliefs.

        • Mike Hind says:

          Not really, as they have very carefully tried to remove all traces of religion from their message this time, probably knowing it is a losing street.

          Also, they apparently lied about the reason for the booking.

          And, finally, it’s not about their beliefs. It’s about the fact that they think that everyone else should be forced to obey the cherry-picked rules of that belief.

          • PWH says:

            you are right it is not only about “their beliefs”… it is also pertaining to the beliefs of Buddism, Hinduism, Mormans, Islam and the very non religious 2 million French who came out to protest same sex marriage and believe marriage is between a man and a woman

            • Mike Hind says:

              Nope. Nothing to do with what I said.
              You’re reaching.

        • jt says:

          Interesting view. Are you willing to apply the same rational to same sex marriage?

        • Come Correct says:

          Then I’m suing government for when I get arrested after burying my girl neck deep and throwing rocks at her head for having an opinion. Lol they weren’t joking when they said the bible is a double edged sword. Might even go find me some slaves tonight and start my own shoe line when I run out of rocks…For the bible tells me so.

        • Build a Better Bermuda says:

          Nope, as a private business, they have the right to choice who uses their facilities, right of any business, just like it is the right for churches to choose who they marry… a right that is not under threat even with same sex marriage. What is going on is that society is moving towards the ending of religious persecution of couples who are same sex, a protection that is a foundation of democracy.

      • Springheeled Jack says:

        Hind supports the conviction of the baker in America for discriminating against the gay couple on the basis of their sexual orientation, but would ardently exonerate the Princess of unlawful discrimination against the conference organisers on the basis of their religious beliefs and political opinions. He is being hypocritical and disingenuous, typical of his well-publicised Christophobia.

        Both forms of discrimination appear on the same statutory list as being expressly forbidden by the Human Rights Act 1981. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Had the bakery case happened here, a conviction of the baker would call for a conviction of the Princess, under the same part of the Act. Hind simply cannot have it both ways.

        The Princess is clearly engaging in an act of ‘moral vigilantism’ and could well be in violation of the Act. To assert otherwise indicates that virtue-signalling to other progressives is more important to Hind than an honest, fair and impartial application of human rights law to people that do not share his views.

        In Dickens’ day, it was said, “The law is an ass!”. Now the law is a Hind. Clearly nothing has changed.

        • Mike Hind says:

          More rewriting of reality and personal attacks from a coward hiding behind a fake name.

          The group was not refused service on religious grounds. That’s something you’ve made up in your desperation to make a point.

          Therefore…

          you’re wrong.

          Again.

      • Joe says:

        Hotels are places of “public accomodation” … just like those bakeries are here in the USA.

        • Mike Hind says:

          Bad comparison. The bakery broke the law. The hotel didn’t.

    • Bermyman says:

      We don’t live in the US, you cannot sue whomever you want for whatever you want in Bermuda. Secondly, it is a private venue, on private property, they can choose who can book it and who cannot. Third, yes gay marriage is currently not legal in Bermuda, but nobody is proposing a Gay marriage take play on the property are they?

      • jim bob says:

        Yes they will be. When they pass gay marriage business wont able to say no just like what happened with the christian bakery being sued by the gays because they didnt want to a cake. Similarly when gay marriage become legal there they will want to sue private and family owned business if they choose not to serve them thus denying people of their right to choose who they do business with.

        • Mike Hind says:

          Discrimination is discrimination and people’s “right” to choose who they do business with ends exactly on that line.

      • mj says:

        and so can everyone else choose if to rent an apartment or give a job to whomever they want. this is not setting a good precedent and Hp should be ashamed of themselves are they open for business or not or just to gays.. this is getting discriminatory on all levels when will it stop! If gays can sue for discrimination so should straight people, just because people have opposing views doesn’t mean either is right or wrong there are differences that we have to contend with but to discriminate against a group of people based upon an invitation to hear dialogue that may offend others NOT EVEN attending is quite distasteful to this island as a tourism place and place of “so called” business..tsk tsk..

        • Mike Hind says:

          Annd again, it needs to be explained that it isn’t the opposing viewpoint, it’s the denial of equal rights that people have a problem with.

          It would be really nice to have some honesty in this discussion and not this dishonest rewriting of reality.

          • mj says:

            that group are not the government Mike, and the government is based on biblical principles to which they swear to and upon and open their sessions with, why are you so afraid of an opposing group who are also free to their opinion .they are not hurting you go and fulfill your dreams without pestering others to accept it through law which already explained stands on biblical principles!

            • Mike Hind says:

              You didn’t read a single word I said.

            • heehee says:

              The government is based on biblical principles
              ????????????????????????????????????

              Hahahahahahahahahahahhahhahhahahahaha

    • Divine says:

      Does this mean that the Hotel will only accept bookings if they agree with the subject?

      Is being against same sex marriages not diverse. There are 2 sides to every situation.

      They should be boycotted by Christians everywhere, but we are not like the other side who try to destroy their opponents or people who disagree with them.

      • Mike Hind says:

        No, that’s EXACTLY what you’re like.
        Trying to paint your opponents with your own behaviour is dishonest.

        • Springheeled Jack says:

          You are, without a doubt, the most bigoted, dishonest and Christophobic person on the Bermuda message boards.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Not even CLOSE to true.

            I know it’s a last resort to start making ad hominem attacks on people, while hiding like a coward behind a fake name, when your position falls apart as the fallacy that it actually is, but please, at least TRY to raise the tone of discussion?

            Nothing I’ve said is dishonest, nor bigoted, nor [sic]‘Christophobic’.
            In fact, I’ve repeatedly championed people’s rights to believe what they want to believe.

            But you don’t care about that, really, do you? You’re just looking to lash out at someone who opposes your hateful cause, aren’t you.

            Let me know when you want to have an honest conversation. I’ll be around.

            • Sickofantz says:

              Mike you are a superstar!

            • JAWS says:

              OMG 99.5% people on here are using fake names. So what your trying to say every ones a coward? Have you ever thought that some bloggers would rather stay anonymous as a result of their jobs.

              You have to come better then that Mike. You’re putting to much emotion into this topic. What you and the rest of the supporters need to do is express their frustration at the present government for not passing the law. Lets get right to the point some men like women and some men like men. The government needs to either pass the law or bury this talk they have the numbers in the house. All this negativity gets us nowhere and solves nothing.

              • Mike Hind says:

                Nope. Not what I said,
                Using a pen name isn’t necessarily bad.

                Hiding behind a pen name while making false personal attacks is just trolling.

                What supporters like me HAVE done is express our frustration with the government, both sides. But we also fight against misinformation and lies being spread in public.
                The response to that is exactly this… Personal attacks, lies and silliness.

                It’s ok. This is too important to care what some silly little person who can’t bring himself to tell the truth and instead lashes out like a toddler with the equivalent of .No, YOU’RE a doo doo head!” Thinks about me,

      • Anbu says:

        Lmao boycotted by christians?! Good!!! As u seem to be the biggest bigots out there. Less christians around the better if u ask me. Well done Hamilton Princess.

        • jt says:

          Wait and see where the PLP hold their banquets in the coming year.
          Will it be principles over glitz and glam?

          • Triangle Drifter says:

            No way. Glitz & bling win out every time over substance.

          • Strike fund says:

            The Princess would never refuse a PLP banquet as there is a good chance of receiving a duplicate payment.

      • JCS says:

        Get out from under your rock Devine. There are many Christians who believe in same sex marriage, and there are many Christians who are in a relationship with a person of the same sex.

      • just wondering says:

        I wonder what you might think if the HP accepted a booking from the KKK??

        • Nanny Pat says:

          Now there’s a thought…let’s have a discussion about that, shall we??
          What’s that I hear Betty? Is that crickets chirping?

    • bdaboy says:

      “traditional Marriage” is the exchange of property.
      It’s unfortunate that there are so many hateful people in Bermuda who don’t understand this.

      • Educated says:

        I was thinking this exact same thing. Its none of anybody’s business who a person chooses to love and I truly believe that if anything happens to the person they love, the partner should be able to have some legal say so in what happens to them and their belongings. Thats it. Leave religion and everything else out of it.

        • Goose says:

          Or be able to visit them in Hospital when they’re gravely ill. “Family only” doesn’t extend to a same sex spouse as it currently stands, even if there’s a valid marriage certificate produced from another jurisdiction.

    • meh. says:

      You said it yourself, U.S. law isn’t Bermudian law. We (thankfully) don’t have the same type of lawsuit culture where everyone can sue everyone for anything.

    • Legalgal says:

      Contractually they are perfectly entitled to. I may not share the views of this group but I will strenuously defend their right to freedom of speech.

      Be that as it may, well done Fairmont for putting principles first, even if it costs you.

  8. Triangle Drifter says:

    LMAO!!! “We had to decieve you” comes to mind. No courage of their views to let the hotel know up front what they are all about.

    Oh well, there should be more than a few church halls willing to take the venue money, maybe even donate the space for free.

  9. Clare says:

    WOOHOOH, Hamilton Princess! Brilliant! Thank you for supporting diversity and inclusion and human rights!

  10. mike says:

    They will find another venue. Why don’t they hold it in a church hall?

  11. betty dump says:

    I am not taking sides on this issue, and quite frankly I care less what becomes of the law as regards to this… but if a homosexual group had their reservation declined because it wasn’t the hotel’s policy, would they not be hollering from the roof tops at discrimination probably start a march and petition and be banging down the human rights commission’s door?

    • Mike Hind says:

      Yes. And they’d be right to do so, as people aren’t allowed to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

      However, a group looking to continue the unfairness of denying equal rights and privileges to a group of our fellow citizens? They’re fair game.

      • bdaboy says:

        Mike, you know that bermudian bigots have no logic, they’re simply not intelligent enough to think for themselves.

      • Actually! says:

        The law doesn’t permit discrimination based on religious beliefs/practices either; but wasn’t this group discriminated against based on their religious beliefs, which they wanted to hold a forum on?

        • Mike Hind says:

          Nope. Not what happened at all.

          • Springheeled Jack says:

            That’s exactly what happened and you know it. Unless you’re utterly delusional which is probably the nicest motive one could attribute to you.

            • Mike Hind says:

              No. It’s not. As explained, this group did NOT identify themselves as a religious group, so that’s not a point.
              They also hid their actual agenda AND identity. This is why they were refused service.
              It had NOTHING to do with their religion.

              But you had a personal attack to make. Sorry. Carry on.

              • PWH says:

                read the article, the group did not hide their idenity they told the Hotel the event was sponsered by Preserve Marriage, and the Hotel initially made the booking

                • Mike Hind says:

                  They also said the presentation wasn’t based in theology, so this entire conversation is based on a false premise.

        • Come Correct says:

          Correct me if I’m wrong but I’m positive Jesus said love thy neighbor as thy loves oneself. Funny how religion kinda defeats itself.

          • smh says:

            So because Christian folks dont agreewith the homo acts they dont love their neighbor? Idiot!

            • Mike Hind says:

              No, as has been explained many, many times…

              It’s not the disagreement “with the homo acts”, it’s the fact that they think that disagreement should be law.

            • Come Correct says:

              Oh name calling, you’re clever. I’ll tear your bible to pieces with facts any day so be careful where you point your finger. Also I’m sure your imaginary friend wouldn’t appreciate the petty name calling.

              • smh says:

                Tearing a bible sounds like it will hurt… #idiot I repeat IDIOT

      • smh says:

        Mike you know you sound stupid and your followers are just that Followers!

        • Mike Hind says:

          I’d respond in a serious way, but I know from past experience that you are incapable of having an honest, real conversation.

          So… have a great day, ok?

  12. campervan says:

    Bermuda taking another step into the light.

    Afternoon tea!
    I will support this business now that I know that it does not discriminate.

  13. Quinton Berkley Butterfield says:

    So “Concerned Citizens” lied about their intentions?? And these are the ones trying to peddle “morals?”

    WOW

    • Tony Brannon says:

      There is more to this….

    • PWH says:

      ….. no one appeared to lie about intentions, if you read what the article recounts, Preserve Marriage made the request for venue

  14. hotcrossbuns says:

    Allan Federer and HP did the right thing here…thanks for standing up for diversity and human rights. We need more business people to take a stand. Where is the OBA and PLP? Just do the right thing.

    • Tony Brannon says:

      It really is time for Bermuda to do the right thing. That includes the PLP & OBA.

      • Concerned says:

        They are – sticking to the Word/BIBLE instructions – Man to Woman and Woman to Man, there is nothing about Man to man and woman to woman.

        • SANDGROWNAN says:

          meh. The Bible.

        • Ha! says:

          Not everyone in the world is Christian nor does everyone believe in or follow that “guidebook”. Religion is not law…

          • PWH says:

            you are correct, it is a matter of the heart… and many other religions and philosphies that have nothing to do with Christianity also believe that marriage is between a man and a woman

        • .... says:

          I’m all for sticking to ones beliefs therefore when a man and woman get married in the eyes of god, are they not then and there married? Why then do they sign a marriage certificate. they already married in the eyes of god no need to legalize it then…

        • Mike Hind says:

          No one is stopping then from sticking to their beliefs. At all.
          What they’re REALLY doing is demanding that everyone ELSE sticks to those beliefs, and that’s what’s not fair.

        • bdaboy says:

          no shellfish, mixed fabrics, etc…why pick and chose what biblical laws you adhere to? Doesn’t this make you a bad christian?

        • Big D says:

          The Bible also says people should be stoned to death for committing adultery…. I haven’t seen any stones thrown in recent history… maybe there is no adultery in Bermuda!!

        • Sick of hearing it says:

          You know, I get really tired of people quoting the Bible when it comes to why we shouldn’t allow same sex marriage. Did you have sex before marriage? Do you use the Lords name in vain? Have you ever lied, cheated or stolen? Or done anything else the Good Word tells you not too?

          Stop using Religion and find another VALID reason why two people who love each other shouldn’t be united.

          • Lady Bug says:

            I would like this comment a thousand times over if I could!

            So. True.

        • meh. says:

          If you were a true Christian you would appreciate and uphold the ideals of separation of church and state. In other words basing government on religious laws is unchristian

          • george says:

            Separation of church and state is not a Biblical concept, it is a secular concept.
            The Bible teaches that government’s laws should uphold God’s law.

        • Yahoo says:

          You still believe in that book of fiction? Smh

      • clearasmud says:

        Fortunately, Mr. Brannon it is not up to you to decide what is the “Right thing” nor is it up to the PLP or OBA. As a democracy it is up to all of the people to decide what is the “Right” thing!

        • Goose says:

          If the abolition of slavery in the USA had been a referendum some of us would likely still be legally classified as property.

          The 90% should never be able to dictate what the rights of the 10% are. Human rights are universal, and love between two consenting adults is currently protected under the amendment to the HRA. Marriage brings protections and rights that are currently denied to same sex couples, making this a human rights issue.

          The courts will settle the issue long before politicians are motivated to.

          • clearasmud says:

            The Courts have already spoken on this issue. The European Court of Human Rights has already ruled that same sex marriage is not a Human Right. They did suggest that countries should consider some form of legal certainty for equality to marriage by having a civil partnership of civil union legislation. They left it to individual countries to decide what they do.

            • Mike Hind says:

              No. _A_ court has spoken on it. Not THE courts.
              There’s a big difference.

  15. Boston Baked Bean says:

    Brilliant decision – thank you Hamilton Princess! The more people that stand up against this kind of bigotry, the better.

  16. St. D says:

    Absolutely fantastic. Respect to HP.

  17. Be Realistic says:

    Well done HP – a great decision for equality and fairness!

  18. hilarious says:

    Am changing my dinner plans on saturday night now, i am going to go support the Princess, and I will make a point of telling them why!

  19. Awesome says:

    Thank you HP for being in the 21st century and standing up for equality for all! I will definitely be patronizing HP more knowing this.

  20. clearasmud says:

    The statement from Hamilton Princess does not make sense because if indeed “The Hamilton Princess’ policy is to celebrate diversity in all its forms, then they would accept ANY and ALL booking. Refusing any group does NOT support diversity, giving access to any and every group does. Discrimination cannot be justified by using discrimination!

    • Mike Hind says:

      Nonsense.
      Refusing service to a group looking to promote discrimination isn’t a bad thing. Don’t be silly.

      • More chirping says:

        I notice everytime this subject comes up you push for Jack & John instead of Jack & Jill. Do you want to marry a man? You will not answer yes or no will you. This is the only sound you make cricket.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8E_zMLCRNg

        • hilarious says:

          More Chirping-

          If you believe its ADAM & EVE, and you want to deny other humans (your friends, your family, your colleagues, your relatives, your neighbours, fellow bermudians) their rights, then you need to

          ADAM & LEAVE.

          Its happening whether you like it or not. Turns out there are more people who are pro equal rights than you and your bigotted ilk.

        • Mike Hind says:

          Oh, I’ll answer. I’ve been married to my wife for 17 years. Together with her for 22.
          That doesn’t mean I shouldn’t fight for what I think is right, using the means I have to do so.

          I am all for “Jack and Jill” if they want to get married. But they’re not being denied that right, are they? Hmm? So, it’s really not that hard to figure out why, when discussing marriage equality, I land on the side of “Jack and John”, is it? Here’s a hint: it’s because they are the ones we’re talking about!

          Now, do you have anything substantive to add? Or are you just going to make silly, ignorant potshots?

          • Titus says:

            I am sorry to say this but you Mike Hind sound intolerant and fascist even though i support gay marriage and i do not agree with HP’s decision.

            • Mike Hind says:

              I don’t know about fascist (that sounds like you’re just lashing out) but I absolutely AM intolerant of people denying rights and privileges to a group of my fellow citizens for dishonest reasons.

              I’m GLAD I sound intolerant of that!

        • Quinton Berkley Butterfield says:

          Trying to associate people with being gay, because they stand up for gay rights is so 1997. It’s 2015. Wake up.

          • smh says:

            Soubds like you and Mike deal in the same dealings….smh sad!

            • Mike Hind says:

              No, what’s sad is a cowardly little troll spreading hate while hiding behind a pen name.
              THAT is what’s sad. And pathetic.

  21. Bdainuk says:

    Kudos to The hotel for not participating in this nonsense! As much as I love Bermuda I am sooooo happy that I have moved overseas! Some bermudians are some of the most hateful, judgemental, pokey people I have encounter in the world! No one minds there own business! A forum to talk about what other people want to do in their own life is absurd! Mind your business!!! If it has nothing to do with you so leave it alone! Living in the uk I’ve seen things I thought I would never see, even with different religions. I could never judge them !! Bermudians have to realise it is a small dot compared to the rest of the world, and just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean you have to take it to the extreme ! So ridiculous ! Bless my island because it definitely needs it! It’s under such a negative cloud and it’s only gona get worse if people don’t change their ways !!

    • Bdainbda says:

      It’s something to do with everyone on this small island. I’m so glad you left Bermuda. How’s the welfare in the UK making out for you every month? Another sponge bob on the system.

      • hilarious says:

        BDAINBDA

        Can you hear yourself? You disgust me. You should be ashamed of your treatment towards a fellow bermudian.

        • Bdainuk says:

          I would never be ashamed of how I feel towards some people! Im obviously not referring to all Bermudians! I am one so I will apologise for that comment because wasn’t at all what I meant! But i really feel sorry for people like you ! The fact that you say to me how’s welfare is ridiculous!! Shows again how small minded ppl can be! You judge because I said I live in the uk and you ASSUME that I’m on welfare y?! It’s actually funny ! Def not on welfare, I work very hard, I am a single mother and I’m studying to be a doctor so pass your foolishness judgment on someone else ! This is the whole reason y this is an argument because of people like you! You think you know everything, you judge people you don’t know, and you put more time and energy worrying about people who want to get married the issues that I’m sure you have in your own life! This has nothing to do with you! At all ! Why can’t you just worry about what’s going on in your own life?! I just don’t understand ! I LOVE MY COUNTRY but it is a fact that Bermudians/We are nosey! You know it we all know it. The point is Bermuda will never change of people keep sticking their nose were it doesn’t belong ! If you child came and told you they were gay and didn’t want to tell you would you change your views ? Just show love stop all the negativity and judgment ! Everyone isn’t made the same ! So except what you personally can’t change and move on! Simple!

          • Kevin says:

            You need therapy, if you allowed a blogger to touch a nerve.

      • Mike Hind says:

        How? How does this have anything to do with anyone else but those that will finally be able to get married?

      • Mikasa.a says:

        Whats it like being so bitter?

    • smh says:

      Im happy you moved too! Gross

  22. GAMEOVER says:

    THANK YOU MR. FEDERER!!

  23. obasellouts says:

    WOW ,

    The gays are in high places for sure.

    Everyone has the right NOT to attend any meeting that they feel is not in their best interest.

    Sad for HP

    But one can fully understand that the noise made by the gays would just not be worth it.

    and they are some noisy sob`s

    Freedom of speech only applies to the loudest most aggressive people.

    • Bdainuk says:

      The fact the you say “the gays” just shows how small minded you really are… Smh

    • Kevin says:

      Have you ever argue with a man that thinks and acts like a woman? Trust me you’ll never win:)

      • bdaboy says:

        “Have you ever argue with a man that thinks and acts like a woman? Trust me you’ll never win:)”

        lol, you actually make your point, although I don’t think you realise how it makes you look.

      • GAMEOVER says:

        All gay men do not act like women or want to be women.

    • bdaboy says:

      “and they are some noisy sob`s

      Freedom of speech only applies to the loudest most aggressive people.”

      The fact that same sex marriage isn’t allowed in Bermuda clearly indicates that the loudest, most aggressive, noisy SOB’s are the hateful bigots like yourself.
      At least you’re honest.

  24. Lennie says:

    I hear Alaska Hall is free those dates

    • hilarious says:

      Great idea. I dont think they will find anywhere else too big. Where is the Semen woman now, why doesnt she let them hold the meeting in her front room? Oh, strangely distant, oh, its nothing to do with you?

      ROFL

  25. cam_j says:

    I agree Fairmont. Down with discrimination. Drinks on me at 1609. lol

  26. shirv_j says:

    Well done to fairmont for staying gutsy

  27. Candy Caramel says:

    HP should hold the forum/meeting there and directly afterwards have a gay union/marriage in the same room!!! LOL Look business is business n HP has the right to hold or not hold any event at their hotel……GO SIMPLE, THE END!!!!

  28. AceBoy89 says:

    Why does gay marriage bother so many people? I really don’t understand why!!! Someone please explain this to me. Just let people live their lives and be happy! Allowing committed gay and lesbian couples to get married does not change the meaning of marriage! It simply allows same-sex couples to marry the person they love, to establish and protect a their family, and to make a lifetime commitment in the same way other couples are able to.
    What defines a marriage is love and commitment, and the ability to protect your family. It’s as basic as the Golden Rule. Treating others as one would want to be treated includes allowing marriage for gay couples who are truly committed to each other. Most straight couples would never want someone telling them they couldn’t marry, and when they think about it, many say they wouldn’t want to deny that for anyone else.

  29. serengeti says:

    Fairmont just went up in my estimation. Well done.

  30. Longtail says:

    Same old bigoted ‘moral’ arguments that were applied in years past to interracial marriages…. When are we going to learn to be respectful of others and grant others the equal rights that ALL should enjoy.

  31. Joe Bloggs says:

    “We were not advised what the nature of the booking was,” explaining
    that it was originally booked by an organisation with a different
    name.

    Now why would that be?

  32. True Believer says:

    God instituted marriage between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN. God did not institute divorce or same sex marriage. The Bible is Gods love letter to us. It is his instruction book to us on how we should conduct ourselves with God, with our mate, with our families, and with each other. Gods Bible teaches us right from wrong. God is not the author of confusion! The World is very confused. One thing i have found is that people will read History and learn History but most will not pick up the greatest History book of all – The Bible – which is also the present and the future. You can’t go wrong if you follow the teachings of the Bible. The issue is… is that the Bible is self convicting and some don’t want to be told that they are doing wrong. The “world”, the Media are all telling you lies…..

    • GAMEOVER says:

      LOL! You are a JOKE!

    • Mike Hind says:

      no one is stopping you from believing that. You are more than welcome to.

      What you CAN’T do, what is unfair, is to demand that anyone else believes what you do.

      • george says:

        Then why are you demanding that everyone believes as you do?

        • Mike Hind says:

          I’m not. Not even a little.

          Look, I know it’s an easy dig, but not even you think this is a valid response.

    • Robert says:

      “but most will not pick up the greatest History book of all – The Bible”

      Thank you. The only comment in this whole thread that made me laugh out loud. “The greatest history book of all”. Now that is funny!

    • trueblue says:

      Your not the only person who was thinking exactly that. I just know that if we as a whole read God’s book of love we wouldnt be so lost.. the devil is working overtime and he knows his calling and election is sure. I have seen the pit of sin and we all think that its pretty and its nothing and we will all be alright. As in the days of Noah so will it be.. i am not afraid to stand up and say been there..tried that and as screwed up as my logic was..soo much unessary confusion came about. God is comming soon. Im one of the minorities but i dont mind. Look how God told Noah to warn the ppl… n only Noah and his family were saved… God is not cold… he is LOVE a word many dont even understand. I do Gods will because he tells us that if we love him..we r to keep his commandments…come on now… wake up Bermuda… but hey wrong is right and right is wrong..i dont listen the mankind… the only person worthy of my total existance is the one who gave me the breath of life this morning. I have no shame of who i love. N thets my God. The one who created every last one of us..who laugh and mock his word. Smh…so sad..

      • Mike Hind says:

        No one is stopping you from having these beliefs and marriage equality will affect your beliefs in no way at all.

        • george says:

          But that’s where you’re wrong. Marriage equality has and will be used to attack the Church and to try to force the Church to change its stance.

          If you truly believe in equality, you will care about protecting Everyone’s rights, including the right of the Church to practice their beliefs (not just those who me you agree with).

          • Mike Hind says:

            Nope. This hasn’t happened.
            The ONLY thing Marriage Equality wants is exactly that.
            The only stance people want changed is the stance that the Church should have ANY say in someone else’s relationship.

            The right of the Church to practice their beliefs will in no way be affected by Marriage Equality, unless you think that the church has the right to tell anyone – other than its members – how they should be living.
            If you do think that, then we have a problem.

    • Mike Hind says:

      “God did not institute divorce or same sex marriage.”

      Then look at the two the same way!
      You don’t want a divorce, don’t get one.
      Same thing for a same sex marriage.

    • Yahoo says:

      The bible is complete fiction. You do know that, don’t you?

      • mj says:

        after you’ve read Deuteronomy 28 tell me the fictitious part, it may not pertain to you but it sure does pertain to a lot of us!The Bible contains a compilation of nationalities of the earth and laws commandments and blessings and curses that have befallen people..The wars of Libya Assyrian and present day weather conditions around the earth are in the Bible that you call fictitious> I guess people aren’t being scattered, I guess mountains haven’t been moved out of their foundation and I guess people are not being displaced,, must be my imagination that people that went into slavery are depicted in Bermudas history book and I guess the governor doesn’t have a feathered hat from the “Indians”,…

    • JCS says:

      The bible was written by scribes, not God, hundreds of years after the events supposedly happened.

    • bdaboy says:

      “God instituted marriage between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN. ”

      there is no god. next.

  33. Boston Baked Bean says:

    @AceBoy89 – You’re absolutely right. I fail to understand the opposition by “straight” Bermudians when most of them don’t even bother to get married and make any kind of lifelong commitment to whatever partner they happen to be with at the moment. Children out of wedlock seems to be ok; multiple partners seems to be ok; adultery seem to be ok; so why in the hell does ANYONE object to a stable marriage and lifetime commitment between 2 people who love and respect each other. Bermuda really IS another world —- and not in a good way !

    • Ann says:

      What a great response Boston Baked Bean! The Bible that they speak of must not mind Children out of Wedlock, Adultery, or Multiple partners! But Gay Marriage is bad, what a bunch of hypocrites! I object to children having children with no future with multiple partners, feel this is a much larger issue for Bermuda than Gay Marriage, what do all the Bible Thumpers think of that?

    • True Believer says:

      No none of the above is ok… Sin is sin in God’s eyes no matter what it is (whether you lie or whether you kill someone)…. the difference will be the consequences you recieve of that sin. Thank you Lord Jesus that he bares the scares of my sins and that I am forgiven ….but because i believe that does that allow me to go on sinning? No…. it puts a fear (a good fear) in me to refrain from sinning (which I am the chief of all sinners).. but by the grace of God I know i am forgiven and God knows I fail Him every day. Thank the Good Lord I know where i am going when he is finished with me.

      • Mike Hind says:

        And please, continue to believe that!
        That is your right and you’re absolutely entitled to believe that.

        What is unfair is when folks expect anyone else to believe it.

  34. SANDGROWNAN says:

    Simple question, for those against SSM:

    Why do you care? It doesn’t affect you, your marriage or relationships. doesn’t force you to do something you don’t want to do. So, why do you care?

    • AceBoy89 says:

      MY POINT EXACTLY!

      • SANDGROWNAN says:

        We won’t get a coherent answer so I’m not holding my breath….

    • Impressive says:

      If I answer your question with my own personal views, can I guarantee that you will respect my views and look to have a civil conversation where you take on my points objectively as I will do with your points, or will you resort to name calling, and putting labels on me and continue to make immature biased comments??

  35. Brian says:

    Just legalize civil unions. Let the religious people keep what they believe to be part of their religion, homosexuals can start their own religion and build their own churches. No one can tell them they are wrong cause it’s written in their bible. You can’t say you can’t do that as it is what every other religion has done. Problem solved move on!

    • Mike Hind says:

      Huh?

      No one is stopping religious people from keeping what they believe to be part of their religion.
      At all. So there’s no need for homosexuals to start their own churches. By the way, you are aware that many churches do, in fact, accept homosexuals and are pro-marriage equality, right?

      Think of it like, as mentioned above, divorce.
      The ability for people to get divorced in no way affects the marriages of people who don’t believe in divorce on religious grounds.
      Same goes for same sex marriages.

      As for civil unions, that way lies “separate but equal”, unless you change the definition of marriage to JUST a religious ceremony… which is a wedding. The church doesn’t actually have any part of a marriage.
      I can assure you that, as an atheist, my relationship with my wife is a marriage and is just as valid as a religious person’s.
      There is absolutely no valid reason to oppose marriage equality that I’ve seen.

      • Brian says:

        As an atheist I don’t expect you to respect people’s religious beliefs, fact is there are religions that state marriage is between a man and a woman and people are fighting against those people for sticking to their guns. All I’m saying is leave them alone they have their rights and should be respected, with that being said I also know that most religions have basically just made their own bible and laws up for themselves (King Henry VIII creating divorce so he didn’t have to kill his wives anymore) and therefore if a gay couple wants to get married in a church but the church opposes make your own like everyone else. By forcing certain churches to allow gay marriage you are forcing them to go against what they believe in.

        • Mike Hind says:

          No one is forcing churches to perform weddings (which, by the way, is what they do. They don’t have anything to do with marriages. They do weddings). That is a fallacious argument.

          As for my atheism, I respect people’s religion and their right to believe whatever they want. What I, and others, have a problem with is when religious folks don’t respect other people’s right to not have to obey the rules and laws of someone else’s religion and use those rules and laws to deny rights and privileges to other people. That simply isn’t fair.

          Same sex marriage should be looked at the same way they look at divorce. It goes against their rules, but doesn’t affect them in any way, so it’s allowed.

        • bdaboy says:

          “. By forcing certain churches to allow gay marriage you are forcing them to go against what they believe in.”

          No one is forcing any church to marry gay people. This is a fallacy made up by bigots who can’t put together a good argument against gay marriage other than “the bible tells me so”.

        • Mike Hind says:

          “All I’m saying is leave them alone they have their rights and should be respected…”

          EXACTLY!
          That’s all WE’RE saying!

          The problem is, those religious people keep refusing to leave other people alone! They refuse to respect other people’s rights of freedom FROM religion and keep trying to continue to deny rights to fellow citizens, based on their religion.

          It’s not the Marriage Equality supporters that are instigating this conflict. They’re fighting back.

          Equal Rights are not granted. They’re won.

      • it says:

        As for civil unions, that way lies “separate but equal”…

        Not really.

        If a civil union is ruled in a court as equivalent to a marriage (as it was in the UK), we are talking about a secular-religious distinction rather than a euphemism for an unjust and racially discriminatory legal system.

        There is a tremendous difference between the social and political disenfranchisement of blacks in the time of Bull Connor and that of Bermudian gays in the time of Sybil Barrington.

        For the record I am in favour of allowing gay marriage here. But I wouldn’t be so quick to reach for inappropriate insinuations like the above, or so quick to charge with bigotry those who are critical of the idea.

        • Mike Hind says:

          Here’s the thing…

          The religious don’t own the word or the concept of “Marriage”.
          It is a legal construct.
          Churches don’t perform Marriages.

          That “secular-religious distinction” is not a fair one, as non-religious people can get married.

          Nitpicking semantics doesn’t help anything. The “insinuation” is absolutely appropriate. People are being denied rights unfairly. Just because other people had it worse – and they did, I’m not denying it – doesn’t mean that this isn’t a similar situation.

          As for the charge of bigotry?
          When someone gives a real, valid argument against marriage equality, one that isn’t based on lies, misinformation or demanding that someone else follow the rules of their religion, we can have that discussion.

          Until then, “bigotry” is an absolutely applicable description of this baseless denial of equal rights.

          • it says:

            Mike, I am not sure what you mean by “owning” the concept of marriage. We probably agree that religious persons do not and should not enjoy exclusive rights to its administration.

            As to your third point, as a matter of fact, churches (in the form of clerics of several faiths) do perform marriages here. This is enshrined in our laws (since marriage is a legal institution, at least in this country) and reflects both Bermuda’s traditions and our cultural evolutions. That non-religious persons can be married as well is a reflection of the latter trend.

            With respect, your suggestion that the “separate but equal” status of black Americans during Jim Crow is broadly similar to that of today’s gay Bermudians regarding civil unions glosses over some dramatic and substantial legal and social differences between them. I used to think the way you do on this as well, but analogizing the sheer injustice in the one to the relative inconvenience of the other is a disservice to the latter’s advocacy, frankly.

            Re picking nits. If it becomes the case that people in Bermuda are eligible for civil unions that are in all legal respects equivalent to marriages, then I fail to see how an argument over the name of the concept is anything but a semantic exercise, seeing as how it does not preclude that relationship’s legal protections or the reality of its existence.

            • Mike Hind says:

              Inconvenience?

              Wow. Ok. I got nothing.

              (And, again, churches do weddings.)

              • it says:

                Absolutely an inconvenience. The second coming of Dred Scott? No. Let’s be a bit more precise about this.

                And again, churches do perform marriages. Read the applicable Acts.

                • Mike Hind says:

                  Re: Dredd Scott… You said that, not me. You’re misrepresenting my position.

                  And go have a wedding in a church and see if it’s legally a marriage without the legal paperwork.

                  That’s the whole point. The church is not the ONLY place that two people can get married. Therefore, they don’t own the word. Therefore, the call for civil unions for gay folks, while allowing straight atheists and members of other religions to call their relationships a marriage, is unfair and unequal.

                  As for your inconvenience line… It shows a complete misunderstanding of this situation. I don’t know how to have that conversation with you.

                  • it says:

                    Maybe mentioning Dred Scott was a bit hyperbolic. I apologise.

                    See how easy that was?

                    Now, are you seriously going to insist that bringing up “separate but equal,” a doctrine which relegated black Americans to second-class facilities (when they were even available), and denied them basic rights of political representation, is an accurate analogy for the protections and recognitions afforded to same-sex couples by civil union legislation?

                    If so, you might understand why so many older church-goers are critical of a lot of what passes for advocacy for gay marriage. You will catch more flies with honey, friend.

                    Moreover, who said anything about church weddings lacking paperwork? You claimed that “Churches don’t perform weddings.” As a matter of law, that’s incorrect. They do perform marriages. As does the Registrar.

                    I think Bermudian same-sex couples should have the same option under the law – but if they could obtain civil unions, with the same legal privileges, how is that “unfair” or “unequal,” exactly? The contrast with “separate but equal” could not be more pronounced.

                    My experience with gay couples in other parts of the world is that they actually prefer the concept of a civil union – “marriage” is something done by their parents. The argument is terminological and cultural, then, not substantive.

                    Anyway. This seems to be the end of our chat. Take care.

                    • Mike Hind says:

                      I explained this.
                      Because one case is worse than the other doesn’t mean the other case isn’t similar.

                      There is absolutely no reason to call them civil unions.
                      None whatsoever. They are marriages.
                      What possible reason could there be to call them anything else?

                      As for the Church performing marriages, I’ve explained several times now. Without the legal paperwork, the stuff that comes from the Government to make it all proper and legal and stuff, it is NOT a marriage.
                      Thus, while they can make all that happen on behalf of the couple, the church cannot – without all the legal stuff, which is separate from the church itself – make a marriage happen.
                      If the paperwork isn’t done and the couple has a wedding in a church, it’s not a marriage.
                      Thus, the church doesn’t perform marriages.
                      I don’t know how to make it clearer.

                      The argument that the word marriage is religious, which you made with the “secular-religious” thing, is a false one.

                      Again, there is absolutely no valid reason to call these “civil unions” that I’ve heard so far.

                      Would you care to provide one?

                    • it says:

                      I can’t reply below, so here is a follow-up:

                      The “similarities” you have suggested between “separate but equal” Jim Crow laws and UK civil union legislation are spurious. One was a happy word that hid abuses of civil rights; the other signified expansion of legal rights to people who otherwise would not have them. The scenarios make for a poor parallel.

                      Re valid reasons for civil unions in Bermuda, once again I reiterate that I agree with you vis-a-vis same-sex marriage. I merely reject the implication that a civil union is some towering injustice. If anything, it is a step forward from what Bermuda already has. After all, there is the small matter of changing minds from a definition of marriage that captures hundreds of years of functional, if imperfect, tradition. Simply dismissing this as a cultural irrelevance is not going to persuade people that a working arrangement needs to be tinkered with. The logic that it is unfair to a gay couple to deny them the title of a marriage can just as easily be applied to other relationships which we do not sanction, e.g. polygamy.

                      Consider the challenges posed in changing our laws. Our Marriage Acts do not recognise same-sex unions. Civil union legislation provides a suitable drafting touchstone for prospective same-sex marriage legislation, if/once we as a society are to go ahead with that. It would make practical sense to borrow from English political and legal experience in this regard.

                      With respect, your initial reply did not clarify anything about paperwork. You stated that Bermudian “churches do not perform marriages.” They do perform marriages, and we agree that this is sanctioned by the government. But they have also provided this service since long before the advent of government licences.

    • DB says:

      Great point, i was about to write something on the same lines. They should have stuck with the unions along with anyone and or body of people who dont classify them selfs as Christians or Religious period. I find it strange for non believers to want to even take part in religious ceremony. And please stop the hating from both sides. To me sounds like a lot of people should have been pressing and pushing the governments from all around the world to legalize civil unions. So lets not hate on each other so much and try and work on whats best for Bermuda.

      Have a great one all.

  36. Keepin' it Real!...4Real! says:

    All of what the Illuminati and their pawns, “the mainstream media,” do nowadays is try to make people more accepting of homosexuality. Whether it be through news columns or your favorite tv shows, they are trying to make you accept gayness and are even promoting it in some instances. Now, all of this is done in the name of creating a more progressive culture where everyone can be tolerated safely. For many, this can be seen as a good thing. After all, people should be able to live their lives as they choose to do so without fear of persecution, right? In that regard, yes. However, the Illuminati have an even more dastardly motive for promoting the acceptance of homosexuality. It’s part of their ultimate plan to breed a master race.

    Think about it. Gay people cannot have children. Sure, there are those few couples that either adopt, use a sperm bank, or surrogate. Then again, most of them just live without reproducing, knowing that that is one of the consequences of their choices. That is what the Illuminati is aiming for. If more people feel comfortable about exploring their homosexual tendencies in a safe environment, they will be less likely to have children. This places the secret order one step further in their goals for world conquest.

    Selective breeding by creating a more homosexual population is something that the Illuminati have been exploring for decades. Their experiments started in the prisons, where they wanted to see if heterosexual men would turn gay in an all-male environment. The answer was yes. Straights will become gay in order to fulfill their sexual desires when circumstances call for it. With this knowledge in hand, the Illuminati moved on to their next step, brainwashing the population through the media. The Illuminati know this phase will take longer but should succeed after several generations. Right now, the plan is still in its early stages, just wear down the public’s intolerance of gays. This started in the 90s and is seeing rapid growth, and guess what, the number of people identifying themselves as homosexual is on the rise.

    Today, we’re seeing the push for gay marriage along with more rights for gay couples. This is a big leap since the days of people barely accepting homosexuals at all. The Illuminati are experts at mind control and know what they’re doing. They’ve got one party in-line with the media, trumpeting homosexuality, and they have the other party offering token resistance just to cover their tracks. Don’t be fooled by any of this. While people should be free to do as they please, that is not an excuse for the Illuminati to seize it as a tool to aid in their selective breeding program.

    • impressive. says:

      Eugenics my brother..

    • Pastor Syl says:

      Do you really believe what you write?? I can’t remember when I have read a bigger load of, for want of a better word, nonsense!

      I don’t have the energy to address all of your points, but I think it is important to note that having sex with someone of the same gender doesn’t automatically make you same gender loving. It is being attracted to and having loving, romantic feelings for someone of the same gender that identifies one as gay or lesbian. It is incorrect and causes much confusion to reduce the issue to who one has sex with. Men having sex with other men in prison is because of abnormal circumstances, and those men generally revert back to their primary affectional gender – the opposite sex…because that is where their true attraction lies.

    • bdaboy says:

      “Think about it. Gay people cannot have children.”

      Sure they can, many do..and are much better parents than a momma with 8 baby daddies.

  37. Whattsapnin says:

    True believer…SMH..

    Are you really serious? Honestly, do you really believe what you wrote just there? I have a Bible. I have a Koran. I use them as reference books to highlight acts of abstract cruelty, acts of discrimination against women, and warmongering Prophets who are child sexual abusers. Fortunately, I also have books on great thinkers too. People who have risen above the plimsoll line of medieval thinking and religious rote gobbledygook. People like Harris, Hitchens as well as Bertrand Russell, Ayan Hirsi Ali, and Carl Sagan to name but a few. I am happy to let you read them.
    Maybe it is time for a more secular humanist group of thinkers to meet and discuss humanist topics in Bermuda. Anybody in?

    • mj says:

      @watssapnin—you have a Bible and Koran–your next step is to read them!so that you have a more educated opinion other than wht you’ve heard!There is no other book tht can compare .

  38. Sincerious says:

    So let me get this clear – the hotel supports diversity as long as it is in line with something they support. Sounds Hypocritical to me.
    As many leaders of democracy and freedom have said – they may not like what someone else has to say but they will fight to the death for their right to say it.
    There are few persons of real integrity in the island so this is just another small minded, hypocritical move on the part of the hotel to ingratiate itself with those who shout down , threaten or otherwise stop a differing view to be expounded.

  39. Quinton Berkley Butterfield says:

    It has become clear to me the magnitude of why they wanted to invite Ryan T. Anderson to Bermuda to speak on Same Sex Marriage.. See this is a man that tries to hide is bigotry behind fake intellect and false research, but his aim is “to take Jesus out” of the argument. But if you do a Google search, it is clear that he is peddling the same religious rhetoric, just under a guise. It is a very clever attempt by the [nameless, hidden] “sponsors” of this event and I give them props for it. Many will be duped by this wolf in sheep’s clothing…

    • clearasmud says:

      You say “this is a man that tries to hide is bigotry behind fake intellect and false research” and how exactly would you know this. Just because someone does not share your view does not give you the right to make such comments.

  40. blazer says:

    AT THE END OF THE DAY, ITS AGAINST GODS LAWS.
    PLAIN AND SIMPLE. I SURELY DONOT WANT TO BURN IN PASSION.
    THE EVER LASTING FIRE.

    • Brian says:

      Which God? If it’s the one where Jesus died for our sins then you are good.

    • Mike Hind says:

      Then don’t get married to someone of the same gender.

      But surely you don’t think that everyone has to obey the laws of your personal choice of religion, do you?

      • True Believer says:

        No not all – Religion doesn’t get you to Heaven. Believing that Jesus died for your sins on the cross and admitting that you are a sinner and asking him into your heart and to forgive you will get you to Heaven.

        • Mike Hind says:

          Huh?

          • True Believer says:

            Yes you read it right…. no religion will get you to heaven. It’s what is in your heart will predicit if you go to heaven or not. If religion was the case to get you to heaven then the following scriptures would be wrong.
            Luke 23:39-43New International Version (NIV)

            39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!”

            40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”

            42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[a]”

            43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

            And now I will pray for all who love this corrupt world that we live in and pray that God will do a might work in you

            • Mike Hind says:

              So… you are FOR Marriage Equality?

              I don’t understand what these posts have to do with what I said.

  41. smh says:

    Smfh

  42. Steve says:

    Shouldn’t they be meeting in a church anyway?

  43. BMI says:

    Personally I feel that most of you jokers have missed the point entirely. Why would any establishment hold a function regardless of the function type or purpose if said function goes against the principles and values of said establishment.
    The Fairmont hotels or any hotel is made to promote diversity. It’s a hotel!

  44. DC says:

    So sad and disturbing that Hamilton Princess cannot accept the Booking….They should be ashamed of doing this and sued for discrimination!! Dr. Ryan Anderson is going to speak about Marriage between a woman and a man and there is nothing wrong with that!! He is not going to bash anyone…. I would like to hear what he has to say and so does a lot of people here on this Island…SO Hamilton Princess what you have done is unacceptable and discriminatory to the highest degree…..shame on you!!

  45. umjusayin says:

    The Preserve Marriage Committee should test the Human Rights Act and see if they have a claim for discrimination based on sexual orientation. This could get real interesting!!

    Let me get my popcorn!!!

  46. Time Shall Tell says:

    Now something’s wrong here, as a landlord you’re not allowed to discriminate against someone renting your lodging based on their sexual beliefs so how can the Hamilton Princess legally turn away someone for their sexual beliefs?

    • Zevon says:

      Have you shared this piece of legal advice with LaVerne? She has no problem discriminating illegally.

    • Fsbod says:

      Because the Hamilton princess accepts everyone and anyone no mater their race or sexual orientation.

      However it seems today that they do not accept hate against their fellow humans.

      • Time Shall Tell says:

        Not taking sides on the Gay marriage issue however just because someone doesn’t agree with you by no means translates to them hating you.

        • Mike Hind says:

          But denying rights to folks has a certain ring of hate, doesn’t it?

  47. John says:

    Hit the road hate spreaders and go read the bible it’s not about hate more about love

    • John says:

      You can have your hate speeches at the “church of the poison mind” read your bibles pick ur sin and own it
      Bermuda does not need a foreign speaker to tell you s what is wrong or right with our lives ,tell him stay home

  48. SANDGROWNAN says:

    Ah, it’s now being held in The New Testament Church of God. LOL.

    The religious right wing, wrong about pretty much everything. Ever.

  49. Navin Johnson says:

    The Hamilton Princess has the b@lls that the politicians lack..I will support the Princess any way I can.

  50. Love me some fish says:

    “The Hamilton Princess’ policy is to celebrate diversity in all its forms, so we advised the organisation that we cannot take their booking.”
    I guess the Princess must also “celebrate diversity” if the satanists forum, the witches forum, the orgies forum, the pro-adultery forum, pro-polygamy forum, pro-bestiality forum, pro-marijuana forum, come to town.

    Marriage as it currently stands, between a man and a woman IS the law of the land. You can cry foul or discrimination as much as you want, it IS STILL the law of the land. No ruling has been made otherwise so you should not ban a forum that is speaking on a subject that IS THE LAW OF THE LAND.

    You see disclaimers everywhere nowadays when providing goods and services. Look at TV stations overseas. Infomercials or religious programs are always accompanied by a disclaimer of the broadcasting station stating that the views in this program is not the view of the broadcasting company. The hotel could have put a sign up outside the forum room displaying its disclaimer.

    The Princess hotel did not act with prudence. What’s next? Banning religious organizations or people from speaking from the Bible, the Koran or any religious book on their premises?

    • SANDGROWNAN says:

      “What’s next? Banning religious organizations or people from speaking from the Bible, the Koran or any religious book on their premises?”

      You say that like it’s a bad thing!

    • Whistling Frog says:

      @ love me some fish:

      I recall staying at the South.P & Hamilton Princess and back then there were bibles in bedside draws. So its obvious, in God they trust…

    • bdaboy says:

      ” What’s next? Banning religious organizations or people from speaking from the Bible, the Koran or any religious book on their premises?”

      One can only hope.
      Private business can do as they please, just like any tv station overseas can refuse to air hate mongering ads.

      Education is the best cure for religion. From what I’ve seen here, bermudas educational system needs a serious overhaul.

      • Tony Brannon says:

        Brainwashing children with fire and brimstone religion has created havoc all over the world. Children deserve love and a proper education, not indoctrination.
        There are schools in Bermuda where some teachers ban the songs of John Lennon and Bob Marley. How tragic. But they themselves were warped by brainwashing. Blind faith will kill your brain.
        One only has to look at the brain surgeon Ben Carson who is running for President in the USA. He believes in “Creationism”. A brain surgeon !
        The very basis of biology is routed in evolution. For a brain surgeon to “believe” in creationism defies the laws of biology.
        http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/ben-carson-argued-evolution-was-encouraged-satan

  51. Coffee says:

    I guess the decision by Hamilton Princess has caused many good law abiding citizens of Bermuda to lose faith and seriously doubt the ability of the hotel management to practice what they attempt to preach . Oh well , let’s see if this will be a good business decision or whether the other establishments will suddenly pick up the lucrative Sunday afternoon crowd .

  52. ImJustSayin says:

    I’m not entertaining any back forth dialogue with any brainwashed religious fanatics. I’m just gonna say well done Hamilton Princess.

  53. Sage says:

    Wow! 203 comments and counting. Am sure all the religious crackpots and part-time Christians are raging away; while the other half of the regular blog trolls are spouting their usual rhetoric. Bet you the bible thumpers will forget their position come the next Sunday Brunch when they load up at Hamilton P! Well done to the hotel, let the hate mongers breathe their own poisoned hot air at the church.

  54. bdaboy says:

    The bible thumpers are too busy having out of wedlock babies by as many daddies as they can
    Bermudas national past time!

  55. Starting point says:

    Private business such as a hotel or church have the right to accept or deny business on their premisses.

    For those who say the Hotel should have held the event we can only assume that you also agree any and every Church in Bermuda that has a hall for rent of any kind, must without exception accept a reservation from a group wanting to hold an atheist rally or in perfect irony, a Gay marriage ceremony in their hall.

  56. Daylilly says:

    There is a lot of Christophobic and anti-Christian speech in this feed. Opposition to SSM is not solely a Christian issue.

    Prior to the SSM movement, most major religions across the world also based marriage on a man/woman relationship that is united by faith in God. Even societies built on religious persecution and atheism maintain marriage between a man and a woman.

    Historically, many countries who diametrically oppose each other on every other issue all came to the same independent conclusion… Marriage is between a man and a woman.

    So did the whole world get together and make marriage laws and form social bonds based on religious bigotry, I think not…

    The stance has always been pro people, gay or straight and against changing the fundamentals of marriage. Opposition doesn’t equal hate.

    • Mike Hind says:

      Denying rights to people for invalid reasons does, though.

      No one should be forced to follow the laws of someone else’s religion. That is the point here. No one is stopping anyone from believing what they want to believe. They’re simply trying to gain access to equal rights and privileges.
      Those opposing have shown absolutely no valid reason to oppose this. At all.

  57. A Bermudian Living Overseas says:

    Declining the booking proves that the Princess Hotel is prejudiced; this is shameful.

  58. cup of tea anyone? says:

    i dont think that word means what you think it means.

    try a dictionary

    toodles!

  59. stunned... says:

    1. agree with SSM
    2. agree with groups being able to hold forums in public places
    3. agree to disagree on the topics and sentiments expressed in these forums, think of recent forum at Liberty Theatre
    4. disagree with HP for refusing the organisers the use of their facilities although i can appreciate that they do not want their brand to be boycotted or tainted in any way by associating with the organisers
    5. agree it’s all about the money not the principle.