Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Concerned Women for America’s golden oldie stereotype: girls + sports = LESBIANS! Previous entry: But feminists are the man-haters

The Peter’s flaccid fed lawsuit against Holiday Inn charges ‘religious discrimination’

Back in 2007, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality was planning to hold one of its pitiful fundraising banquets at the Holiday Inn Select in LaBarbera’s town of Naperville. He told staff there that there that he expected the homophobia-laden event would draw protestors. Six weeks before the event, the hotel canceled on him, citing “potential negative publicity.”

So now The Peter is dropping a federal discrimination lawsuit on Holiday Inn—based on bias against AFATH’s religious beliefs against homosexuality. OK. Look at how weak this is:

LaBarbera did not have a written contract, and no money was exchanged, but he said organizers verbally worked out details of the 100-person event, including the menu, during two meetings.

...“It’s always easy to come up with excuses,” said LaBarbera, AFTAH’s executive director, “but the real truth is they didn’t like our message. If you allow this sort of hecklers’ veto, you’re sanctioning discrimination.”

OMG, what flaming crap that is—“heckler’s veto.” How many times has the right wing protested LGBT and progressive events? If bible beating attempts at a “heckler’s veto” fail to garner the desired results (cancellation, bad publicity), perhaps it’s because the message is so ridiculous and offensive that no one gives a flip. When you sue a hotel for religious discrimination that you didn’t even sign a contract with, that smacks of either stupidity or raw headline hunting, not a noble effort to protect religious liberty.

And when The Peter opened his trap and announced there was a potential for demonstrations outside the venue, he basically handed Holiday Inn an out—they aren’t obligated to sign a contract with any organization if the hotelier doesn’t want bad publicity, potential for violence or to need extra security (after all, who knows what kind of overblown expectations The Peter relayed).

More below the fold, including reaction to the article.

In this case, the Holiday Inn Select was also going to host a wedding event on the same night as Peter’s shindig and didn’t want blowback from that paying customer that surely already had a contract in place. When something like this happens, it may suck for your organization, but you can always speak with your feet and take your business elsewhere. And AFATH did.

I’m having difficulty seeing any religious discrimination angle that would get this past the first review of the case. Commenters at the Daily Herald were blunt:

Peter LaBarbera’s all-consuming obsession with All Things Homosexual strikes me as both incredibly un-Christian and more than a little, um, perverse. Help him, Jesus.
Lunchbox :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 12:41 AM+29

Is it fair to all the other guests - including an entire wedding party - to allow a controversial group gather when protesters are expected? The Holiday Inn is not a public place. You do not have freedom of speech everywhere you go. Read the constitution, in detail. This was not a case of discrimination. Hotel management simply made a sound business decision, period.
hester1 :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:52 AM-5

Nothing in writing…..no contract…..what is Mr. LaBarbera talking about? Without proof of an agreement, this case should go right into the circular file. I am also completely heterosexual, and the only time that anyone who is homosexual would bother me, would be if they tried to push their beliefs onto me. Well, that is what Mr. LaBarbera’s group sounds like they do, just the opposite. Its too bad that this man scheduled this conference without booking it properly through the hotel, as evident by lack of a contract. No contract…..no case!
pn :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:34 AM+6

We still have a long way to go in treating people equally, and civil rights for gays/lesbians is a big part of this. It’s too bad that Mr. LaBarbera and people like him don’t realize that. Bravo to the hotel management for considering their other guests when deciding how to handle this situation.
Haereticum pro Orthodoxy :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 4:38 AM+15

Sounds like someone was ‘fishing for media attentions’, free publicity, drumming up false outrage to me, and perhaps making a fat handful of cash from a settlement.
WilsonP :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 5:41 AM-6

For those who support the hotel in this, imagine that the tables were turned. Suppose it was a homosexual group that had been turned down by the hotel because of “negative publicity.
Would you still support the hotel’s right to discriminate in this fashion?
Sauce for the goose…
zabes :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:12 AM+9

I hear that the Klan has a hard time booking places as well.
motorcyklmikl :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:36 AM+6

Unspecified damages and attorney’s fees? Get over it and move on.
used to be jimbo1958 :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:47 AM+10

Peter Laberbera
Disrupting someones wedding is more important to you, You are a shortsighted person, I know if I owned a hotel and a blissful thing like a weding reception was at my hotel and a hete filled banquet was scheduled the same night with no CONTRACTS signed you would be on the street, also I hope the judge tosses out your suit, because you didn’t have a SIGNED contract. How many times have people told you, “Do you have it on paper?”
yahoos67 :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:55 AM+10

simple as this - no signed contract, no lawsuit. next.
Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:58 AM

Anyone who is that obsessed with the “gay agenda” is definitely hiding some issues of his own. As for having no written agreement, I have a bridge I’d LOVE to sell this guy. What an idiot! This has inspired me to rent a room in this hotel.
yahoos67 :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:15 AM-7

The Holiday Inn Select should have the absolute right to consider the impact an event will have on their property when deciding whether to book an event. If goofus tells them that the little soiree he has planned is going to bring down 300 protesters making the front of the hotel look the the pride parade, then he should expect to be told… “Umm, thanks for thinking of us, but we just don’t think that event is in the best interests of our business.” Period. There should be no guarantee that just because a group has enough money, they can go anywhere they want and do anything they want. Homo/straight, pro-life/pro-choice, pro-2nd amendment/pro-gun control - matters not the cause. Mr. LaBarbarella: it’s called PRIVATE PROPERTY for a reason. Get over it dude, and go cry to someone else. I’m sure that there’s a hotel somewhere in the chicago area that will gladly take your group in with open arms. Maybe even give you a big group hug while their at it…
Nancyspartan :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:50 AM+10

This group is not a Christian group - it is a hate group. Do some research. I believe that Holiday Inn has the right to say who does and does not use their site. As far as this group goes, there are forest preserves, open air park or maybe a garbage dump where they can promote their hate doctrine.
NoBS :: Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:52 AM+3

The Peter must be hard up for cash and attention; I guess the purses of the seasoned citizens he scams into thinking the Homosexual Agenda is going to destroy society have slammed shut. I wonder if his BFF Bam Bam is helping him out on this legal plea for attention.

H/t, JMG.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Pam Spaulding on 03:30 PM • (18) Comments

Hotels must never cancel room reservations for religious hecklers (or at least, Christian hecklers), but religious organizations should never be compelled to marry gay couples.

Ba da boom.

Comment #1: Lesly  on  08/29  at  04:10 PM

They shouldn’t call it Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH), it should be Americans Spreading Hate Of Lesbians and Everyone else (ASHOLE).  Much more appropriate…

Comment #2: MikeEss  on  08/29  at  05:18 PM

Assuming that the lawsuit is real, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. Especially since in Illinois we have workplace non-discrimination in place. The protest issue alone should be enough.

Comment #3: Lymis  on  08/29  at  05:21 PM

This lawsuit is going nowhere.  He might have had a legal argument if contracts had been signed and deposits been made, but since the Holiday Inn nixed this event before anything was formalized, this dipshit has nothing.

I imagine this will likely get thrown out before it ever even reaches a trial, perhaps for lack of standing.

Comment #4: DTG in STL  on  08/29  at  05:44 PM

I think some here are missing the larger point which is simply, this is a mild extortion aimed at Holiday Inn.  Give us some money or we’ll smear you are the ally of teh gays.  I don’t think it will work but it is an interesting way to raise money.

Having set up similar things at hotels it’s been my experience that the *first* thing that happens is a deposit and a contract.  If he didn’t have that six weeks before the event, there was no way the event was going to happen.  This is a con from the start.

In the end, dude’s going to be empty handed.

And by the way, isn’t Holiday Inn Select the budget HI mark?  What, they couldn’t afford a full-blown Holiday Inn?  Pathetic.

Comment #5: ice weasel  on  08/29  at  05:58 PM

...“It’s always easy to come up with excuses,” said LaBarbera, AFTAH’s executive director, “but the real truth is they didn’t like our message. If you allow this sort of hecklers’ veto, you’re sanctioning discrimination.”

This would be a more clear-cut case.

Comment #6: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  08/29  at  08:28 PM

Solid proof that the anti-equality agenda is a serious threat to at least one wedding.

Comment #7: Tesla Dethray  on  08/29  at  08:39 PM

I think Ice Weasel has it, only not strongly enough. If your six weeks out from the event and you don’t have a contract and deposit with the venue, you also don’t have contracts with the publicity people (because they don’t know what to advertise), you probably don’t have confirmations from your speakers, and dollars to donuts you don’t have the attendance commitments that would furnish you with the money to pony up a deposit.

So what do you do? You tell the venue that holding your event could disrupt all the other events held there at the same time and possibly get the place trashed. They cancel, and you get to play the victim instead of the loser who couldn’t organize a “christian” dinner in the middle of the midwest bible belt.

Comment #8: paul  on  08/29  at  09:00 PM

Ah, Naperville.  I’m glad there were some normal comments in the Herald.  Normally the Napervillians who bother to write in to any local paper are the type of people of whom other Midwesterners would do well to be embarrassed.

I’ll never forget the day of that enormous immigration rally in Chicago a few years ago.  The Aurora Sun headline ran, “The Day the Lawns Weren’t Mowed.”  No lie.

Comment #9: themmases  on  08/29  at  09:36 PM

Tort Reform!  Tort Reform!
Wait, are we on the wrong GOP talking point?  I can never remember.  :-p

Seriously, when has an organization ever been protected on an individual issue?  Denying a person or group of people based on race is one thing, but there’s no law obligating the Holiday Inn to host a NAACP event or a Chinese New Year Party.

I do appreciate how religious institutions have suddenly developed an abiding love for civil rights, but it might be good for them to brush up on how those civil rights actually work before they start screaming about violations.

Comment #10: Zifnab25  on  08/29  at  10:20 PM

I’ll never forget the day of that enormous immigration rally in Chicago a few years ago.  The Aurora Sun headline ran, “The Day the Lawns Weren’t Mowed.” No lie.

WHAT?!

Comment #11: pitbullgirl65  on  08/29  at  11:17 PM

So now The Peter is dropping a federal discrimination lawsuit on Holiday Inn—based on bias against AFATH’s religious beliefs against homosexuality. OK.

I’d like to see one of these trials go forth. What I hope for is that the Clarence Darrow of our time defends the hotel or whoever; and crossexamines the beliefs of the plaintiff.

“When talk turns to school prayer, do you recite Matthew 6:5,6?”

“Those who heard Jesus with their own ears thought he was talking figuratively when he made his quote about ‘a camel passing through the eye of a needle.’ They’d seen it done—figuratively. Because you’re only familiar with the literal meaning of that phrase, do you think that you know Christ better?”

“What does Leviticus say about Woody Allen?” (If plaintiff says he or she doesn’t know Allen that well to get the reference, procede with “What does Leviticus say about men who marry their stepdaughters?”)

“Those who heard Jesus with their own ears thought ‘Good Samaritan’ was an oxymoron. In the centuries since the Crucifixion, it’s become a cliche. Do you think that because you automatically add ‘Good’ when you hear ‘Samaritan;’ that makes it easier for you to get into heaven?”

In some online debates, I said I wish I had a million dollars that I could just throw down on the table and say, “If you can take 15 of these Bible passages and prove that you live them, the money is yours.”

Nobody ever said, “Find your money because you’ve got your challenger.”

Comment #12: Judge Moonbox  on  08/30  at  12:27 AM

Paul and Ice Weasel are right on. And now this maroon is wasting money on a lawyer trying to sue for unspecified damages?  Any intelligent lawyer wouldn’t touch this loon with a ten foot pole.  I mean not only is this a losing bet but I bet he’ll stiff the attorney as well.  If he has one and it isn’t a cheap political stunt to get some free advertising and cross carrying.

Comment #13: Amalink  on  08/30  at  01:09 AM

It’s getting harder and harder to get air time on Fox News.

Comment #14: 3letterjon  on  08/30  at  08:07 AM

Any intelligent lawyer wouldn’t touch this loon with a ten foot pole.

If a lawyer didn’t take his case, it would only prove how that lawyer was once again practicing discrimination against the crazy people minority

Comment #15: Zifnab25  on  08/30  at  03:54 PM

You assume lawyers are motivated by the magic of the free market.  I’m sure he’s got some Liberty University grad whose entire career is built on wingnut welfare, ready to go to bat for him.

Comment #16: libdevil  on  08/31  at  11:53 AM

He knows he doesn’t have a good lawsuit.  He’s going to get some publicity from the filing, that’s it.

Comment #17: Magis  on  08/31  at  12:36 PM

Any intelligent lawyer wouldn’t touch this loon with a ten foot pole.

So he’ll get an unintelligent one.  Call it “The Religious Right Litigation Paradox”:

Never waste good money on the kind of lawyer who would agree to argue your case.

Comment #18: DaveL  on  08/31  at  11:00 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.