Holiday Inn in Dresden denies Neo-Nazi party leaders hotel room

[Louis VI the Fat]

Initially, I had a good laugh over it. Quite an inventive letter by the hotel. Why, of all places, should a Dresden hotel host neo-nazis? The city is a painful monument to what nazi madness leads too.

Then I got to think about it a bit more. What if a Dresden hotel doesn't want to host a rabid rightwing pro Israel group, on the grounds that they support terrorism? I can already imagine the headlines.

Even better, what if a German hotel uses it's right to decide who they alow in and simply ban Jews period? Put a sign up, 'Juden nicht gewunscht' ?

[Husar]

Even better, what if a German hotel uses it's right to decide who they alow in and simply ban Jews period? Put a sign up, 'Juden nicht gewunscht' ?

There's a big difference between being a jew and being a neo-nazi hatemongerer in my book. Nazi symbolism is banned here as well unless used to teach history, but noone is afraid that we will ban the peace sign next.

[Ronin]

sure those guys are racist idiots...

but......you´re protesting against their discriminating racist policies by discriminating against their political ideas in your hotel?



sure these guys are douchebags...but why discriminate yourself?.. why not let them stay, take their money, and then offer it to the synagogue with a nice public statement?

[Tribesman]

I think anyone should be able to deny anyone anything.

No , racist scum have rights too , their rights are set out in law , especially concerning access and contracts of service .

why not let them stay, take their money, and then offer it to the synagogue with a nice public statement?

Ronin , that is what is being done in this case , they have the option of staying at the hotel because they booked and it was accepted . What they recieved was a rather polite invitation to take up the option of not demanding the fulfilment of the contract .

They did have another problem recently where they was denied a booking for a party conference , under the law as a legal party they can not be denied the use of a publicly owned building for party business , but it turned out the building wasn't publicly owned so they didn't have that right the same as their protests in Bavaria about holding rallies at a village war memorial are being blocked ,the villagers own the memorial and the surrounding square so can block access to the political gathering .

[Proletariat]

No , racist scum have rights too , their rights are set out in law , especially concerning access and contracts of service .

What's a right of access? Contracts I won't dispute, but I don't think we even have something like a 'right of access' here. Are there laws where you are saying a proprietor has to provide service for everyone who comes along?

[Tribesman]

What's a right of access?

Its a privately owned building which is licenced to be open to the public isn't it , to bar members of the public from gaining that access you have to show legal grounds why they cannot enter , a lunatic political ideology is not a legal ground to deny access .
Thats why they cannot flat out refuse the booking , however once they are in the hotel it wouldn't take much to see to it that you can make some legal grounds to eject them .

[Husar]

Its a privately owned building which is licenced to be open to the public isn't it , to bar members of the public from gaining that access you have to show legal grounds why they cannot enter , a lunatic political ideology is not a legal ground to deny access .

Didn't know that either, so that would count for most shops as well I guess since they're open to the public?

[LittleGrizzly]

By the sounds of it they're a legitimate political party (however racist they are) so they shouldn't be refused services, the hotel owner played it brilliantly!

[Redleg]

Its a privately owned building which is licenced to be open to the public isn't it , to bar members of the public from gaining that access you have to show legal grounds why they cannot enter , a lunatic political ideology is not a legal ground to deny access .

In the context that this sentence is written - I am not sure your correct, since privately owned business's in the United States have the ability to refuse service to anyone they wish. Now that business must be careful about refusing service, but according to the law here a private business can indeed refuse to serve an individual.

Thats why they cannot flat out refuse the booking , however once they are in the hotel it wouldn't take much to see to it that you can make some legal grounds to eject them .

Now this part I tend to agree with - easy for a hotel to evict a guest based upon some criteria.

[HoreTore]

Its a privately owned building which is licenced to be open to the public isn't it , to bar members of the public from gaining that access you have to show legal grounds why they cannot enter , a lunatic political ideology is not a legal ground to deny access .

That would depend on the country and legal system in question. I know that isn't the case here.

[PanzerJaeger]

Such bravery!

[IrishArmenian]

No , racist scum have rights too , their rights are set out in law , especially concerning access and contracts of service .

But businesses reserve the right to deny service to anyone, yes?
I am acting rather hypocritically here, congratulating a man for political discrimination, but I want to pat that man on the back and buy him a round. I love the synagogue remark!

[Crazed Rabbit]

No , racist scum have rights too , their rights are set out in law , especially concerning access and contracts of service .

No what, tribesy? Prole was talking about what should be, not the law as it stands. Strawman.

Or are your opinions of what is right dictated by what is written in law?

CR