Retirement communities...next SSM legal dispute

[bcbsr]

Maybe, but discriminating on the basis of gender violates federal housing law. That's what the suit is claiming.

If that's the case, the issue might be whether it's federal housing or private property. For example I know that if I rent a room out in my house I'm not under federal housing law and can discriminate. The fact the "senior" housing is allowed to discriminate based on age leads me to believe that they are not under federal housing law.

 

[SimplyMe]

If that's the case, the issue might be whether it's federal housing or private property. For example I know that if I rent a room out in my house I'm not under federal housing law and can discriminate. The fact the "senior" housing is allowed to discriminate based on age leads me to believe that they are not under federal housing law.

No, federal housing laws apply to private property, as well, just that there are exceptions for people who are just renting a couple of rooms in a home they live in.

 

[jayem]

No, federal housing laws apply to private property, as well, just that there are exceptions for people who are just renting a couple of rooms in a home they live in.

Correct. FV is a corporate enterprise which owns 2 large, multi-unit developments in the St.Louis area. It is absolutely subject to federal housing laws.

 

[bcbsr]

No, federal housing laws apply to private property, as well, just that there are exceptions for people who are just renting a couple of rooms in a home they live in.

I could rent a whole house or two and still be exempt. And there is some kind of exemption for senior communities, else they couldn't be "senior". It would be age discrimination.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

And what's the betting that they chose that particular one because they knew they would be refused.

Point being?

That's like saying "Rosa Parks purposely chose that seat on the bus because she knew it would draw attention to herself and knew that it would cause a stir"

There's nothing wrong with taking steps to draw attention toward discriminatory processes that need to be changed.

If, and that's a big IF, that's what they were actually doing. ...considering that there's ample evidence to suggest that's not what was going on in this case. (as many others have already pointed out)

 

[SimplyMe]

I could rent a whole house or two and still be exempt. And there is some kind of exemption for senior communities, else they couldn't be "senior". It would be age discrimination.

Yes, it appears you could but that is pretty much the limit before the law applies to you. The law is summarized here (with a link to US code).

 

[SilverBear]

Ah yes, that well known Christian virtue of slander.

it's not slander if you lie about homos

 

[SilverBear]

It's kind of the same issue of a younger couple trying to get to live in a "senior" community and then complaining of age discrimination for not being allowed to. Fact is these communities do have certain rights to restrict those who are to live there.

you mean like this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/We_want_white_tenants.jpg

 

[Andrew77]

you mean like this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/We_want_white_tenants.jpg

So what are you saying? You support forcing people to live with people they don't want to live with?

Regardless of your endless justifications, the fact is, saying others must do what you want is tyranny.

You can justify tyranny until the end of time, and its still tyranny. That makes you a tyrant, and that is exactly the kind of garbage we had a revolution over. No one, has the right to force others to serve them. Period. No one does.

 

[cow451]

So what are you saying? You support forcing people to live with people they don't want to live with?

I don’t want to live around people that put Trump and Cruz signs, but I have to allow them. We even have ...gasp.... two lesbun women living her with two-count ‘em- two children.

Actually the lesbuns are way better neighbors than the Trump and Cruz guys.

 

[Andrew77]

I don’t want to live around people that put Trump and Cruz signs, but I have to allow them. We even have ...gasp.... two lesbun women living her with two-count ‘em- two children.

Actually the lesbuns are way better neighbors than the Trump and Cruz guys.

Ok? That's fine with me. I would rather you have the freedom to do with your property as you wish. I'll go live somewhere else.

It would never occur to me that I magically have the right to force you to take me in.

 

[Goonie]

Ok? That's fine with me. I would rather you have the freedom to do with your property as you wish. I'll go live somewhere else.

It would never occur to me that I magically have the right to force you to take me in.

Just to note they are not asking to live with you, just purchase a property in the Neighborhood.

 

[Andrew77]

Just to note they are not asking to live with you, just purchase a property in the Neighborhood.

This isn't a condo, or a townhouse, or something of that nature. It's a retirement community.

I live in a condo. I have no idea when the last time it was, that I actually have spoken to any of the neighbors in my area.

Retirement communities are completely different. You do everything with the other members in your community. Both my grandmothers lived in such places, and that was a large part of the package, in determining where they stayed.

You are in a common building, with a common eating area, and common activities area. You spend most of your day, with the other people from your community. When you go shopping, it is usually with the other people from your retirement community.

So yes, it is like you live together. And they have the right to make whatever rules they want, for the property that they have.

And honestly, for many people, I guarantee that it is the rules that govern that community, that attract the people who want to live there. Some people want those rules in place that are Christian based, like traditional marriage.

So no, it's not like a lesbian couple moving into the condo next to me, at all. Not the same.

 

[NotreDame]

ST. LOUIS • A St. Louis County senior community has denied housing to a married lesbian couple who have been together for nearly four decades because of the couple’s sexual orientation, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court.

Mary Walsh, 72, and Bev Nance, 68, both of Shrewsbury, say the Friendship Village senior living community, which has locations in Sunset Hills and Chesterfield, denied occupancy to them to live at the Sunset Hills community in 2016 because their relationship violated its cohabitation policy that defines marriage as “the union of one man and one woman, as marriage is understood in the Bible,” according to the lawsuit...

The couple paid a $2,000 deposit and knew they were rejected 2 years ago. I wonder why they're just filing suit now. According to the retirement center's website, it follows Biblical values, but is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or operated by any particular church.

It'll be interesting to see where this goes. The suit was filed in federal court. Sexual orientation is not currently a protected class under federal housing law. Neither is marital status. So if the court applies a strict reading of the law, their case will be dismissed. But sex is a protected class. If they can convince the court that they're being rejected purely because of sex, then they could prevail.

Even if they lose the case, they should definitely get their deposit back. With interest.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_0233aeb6-3585-511e-a198-74d7c4c05b36.html

Given the fact several federal circuit courts of appeal have taken a broad meaning of the phrase “because of sex,” and the word “sex” to include sexual orientation, under Title VII, 7th and 6th Circuits, to name a few, it is logical to take the same meaning of identical language in the FHA.

 

[NotreDame]

It's kind of the same issue of a younger couple trying to get to live in a "senior" community and then complaining of age discrimination for not being allowed to. Fact is these communities do have certain rights to restrict those who are to live there.

That’s not parallel, because “younger couple” isn’t protected under the FHA, but “sex” is, and the court’s interpretation of “sex” has been held to include sexual orientation by several federal appellate courts.

 

[NotreDame]

If that's the case, the issue might be whether it's federal housing or private property. For example I know that if I rent a room out in my house I'm not under federal housing law and can discriminate. The fact the "senior" housing is allowed to discriminate based on age leads me to believe that they are not under federal housing law.

The FHA doesn’t protect “age”. The FHA does protect “familial status” and there are age considerations pertaining to children of a family under 18, but not protections for “age.” Since FHA doesn’t protect “age,” one can discriminate on the basis of age outside the context of “familial status” and still be subject to FHA.

Furthermore, under federal law, housing for the elderly or older people, and discrimination on the basis of age, i.e., too young, is allowed. See Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995.

 

[Belk]

So what are you saying? You support forcing people to live with people they don't want to live with?

Regardless of your endless justifications, the fact is, saying others must do what you want is tyranny.

You can justify tyranny until the end of time, and its still tyranny. That makes you a tyrant, and that is exactly the kind of garbage we had a revolution over. No one, has the right to force others to serve them. Period. No one does.

The entirety of our law system is tyranny? Well, that is a new definition.

 

[JackRT]

People keep trying to be as unchristian as possible toward their fellow human beings.

 

[SilverBear]

So what are you saying? You support forcing people to live with people they don't want to live with?

Regardless of your endless justifications, the fact is, saying others must do what you want is tyranny.

You can justify tyranny until the end of time, and its still tyranny. That makes you a tyrant, and that is exactly the kind of garbage we had a revolution over. No one, has the right to force others to serve them. Period. No one does.

what are you saying? you support denying people housing because some people are bigots?

Regardless of your endless justifications, the fact is, denying others equal rights and equal protections is tyranny.

You can justify tyranny until the end of time, and its still tyranny. That makes you a tyrant, and that is exactly the kind of garbage we had a revolution over. Everyone is constitutionally guaranteed the same rights and legal protections as everyone else....Everyone, even the people you have chosen to hate.

 

[cow451]

Ok? That's fine with me. I would rather you have the freedom to do with your property as you wish. I'll go live somewhere else.

It would never occur to me that I magically have the right to force you to take me in.

But do I have the right to keep you out because I don’t like your gender?