It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gay-only housing paid by your tax dollars?

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Are our tax dollars going to build gay-only housing? In multiple cities across the US, it appears your tax dollars are going to provide housing that only a small subset may benefit from:


www.welcome2thebronx.com...
The Bronx (along with Brooklyn) will be the home of a new development of New York City’s first senior housing development with services benefiting the elder LGBT community. ... Ingersoll Senior Residences and Crotona Senior Residences build upon precedents of LGBT-inclusive senior housing that has been built in Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago and Minneapolis.


So much for non-discrimination laws. Some citizens are apparently more equal than others.



The 82 unit Crotona Senior Residences will be developed by NYC Housing and Preservation, HELP USA, NY State Homes along with Community Renewal and SAGE (Services and Advocacy for GLBT Elders).


Read: the taxpayer gets to pay for it.



The Bronx development,,,, will be open to all qualifying seniors regardless of their sexual orientation


That only means they will have one or two token heterosexuals, to make it look good.

Now can you imagine the uproar if these developments were designated for heterosexuals only?

edit on 16-8-2016 by starviego because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:04 PM
link   
It's for seniors. So what if they're gay? What's wrong with lumping bunches of them together?
Don't tax dollars get used to build facilities for straight old people?



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: starviego


Now can you imagine the uproar if these developments were designated for heterosexuals only?


No. I can't imagine.

What I can literally see is your outrage at "all inclusive homing for elderly people".


(post by AmericanRealist removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: snowspirit
What's wrong with lumping bunches of them together?

(Gasp!) That's discriminatory and exclusionary! How dare you! Stop the hate! End the violence!


originally posted by: snowspirit
Don't tax dollars get used to build facilities for straight old people?

No, they don't.


originally posted by: Hazardous1408
What I can literally see is your outrage at "all inclusive homing for elderly people".

All inclusive? Did you even read my post?


originally posted by: AmericanRealist
These people tend t get crazier with age, so if anything this is a positive step to mitigate the threat factor of mentally ill.

Excellent point. If you can guarantee that the developments will be lock-down facilities, I will withdraw my objection to this program.
edit on 16-8-2016 by starviego because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: starviego

originally posted by: AmericanRealist
These people tend t get crazier with age, so if anything this is a positive step to mitigate the threat factor of mentally ill.

Excellent point. If you can guarantee that the developments will be lock-down facilities, I will withdraw my objection to this program.


Much to your chagrin, and therefore my happiness, no... They won't be "locked down".

Suck it up.


Edit:

All inclusive? Did you even read my post?


Yes, I did.
It was full of spin compared to the actual article you claim to be basing your post on.
edit on 16-8-2016 by Hazardous1408 because: Noted.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Why use money to build housing for people in the US when it can be spent to destroy houses of people in foreign countries.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: starviego

Oh ffs! It's a senior home home geared toward elder LGBTQ, meaning all programs and activities will heavily focus on same sex couples and trans people, it does not mean that only LGBTQ elders can live there.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: starviego

This is some sensational bull#. It's funny how your own source proves you wrong, but you just dismiss that with some stupid rhetoric about "token heterosexuals".



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: starviego

It's apaprently necessary

This includes a 2014 report by the Equal Rights Center, with support from SAGE, which found that 48% of LGBT older people applying for senior housing as part of a national test were subjected to discrimination.
.
It will have necessary services for the elder LBGT community but allow both LBGT and NON LGBT elderly to live there.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:42 PM
link   
I am reading these replies with a sense of wonder.


originally posted by: reldra
It's apparently necessary

This includes a 2014 report by the Equal Rights Center, with support from SAGE, which found that 48% of LGBT older people applying for senior housing as part of a national test were subjected to discrimination.
.
It will have necessary services for the elder LBGT community but allow both LBGT and NON LGBT elderly to live there.


Seriously, do you consider that to be an unbiased poll? And even if senior LBGT do face discrimination in housing, why is it my responsibility to make up for it? Clearly, this housing is going to be marketed mostly to gay seniors, and that's who is going to be living there.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Well, in civilian world it is discrimination at best and corrupt at worse.

However, this is exactly the solution that they have been searching for in the military. The real reason behind don't ask don't tell in the military had zero to do with anti-gay. All units have always had them and nobody has ever cared. But the justification for separate barracks, showers, and bathrooms for men and women is to keep down harassment, and inappropriate conduct due to sexual attraction. You cannot keep up that pretense AND have gays in the same units, it just doesn't work (officially that is). So . . . many many years of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Seems to me that the new topics headline reads:
"Gay-only housing paid by your tax dollars."
While the post itself reads :
"Gay-only housing paid by your tax dollars ?"

Then we see that you made an 'edit' which might indicate that you edited your title after it had been posted in the new topics list, a title which would change in the post but not change in the new topic list once it had been posted.

Why the change? Not so sure any more?

EDIT Appoligies OP, I was corrected by Haz, and now know my suppostion was very possibly incorrect.
edit on 31America/ChicagoTue, 16 Aug 2016 13:57:52 -0500Tue, 16 Aug 2016 13:57:52 -050016082016-08-16T13:57:52-05:00100000057 by TerryMcGuire because: Appoligies OP, I was corrected by Haz, and now know my suppostion was very possibly incorrect.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: starviego
Seriously, do you consider that to be an unbiased poll? And even if senior LBGT do face discrimination in housing, why is it my responsibility to make up for it? Clearly, this housing is going to be marketed mostly to gay seniors, and that's who is going to be living there.


Dude your location says San Diego. This is happening in NYC. You aren't paying for anything here. You're just acting indignant because you think you've found some discrimination, but your blatant sensatinoalism and attempt to dismiss inconvenient facts makes it obvious you are just faking outrage here. Stop whining about something NYC decided to do in conjunction with a company (that is also paying for this development). Your argument is hollow.
edit on 16-8-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Dude your location says San Diego. This is happening in NYC. You aren't paying for anything here.


The funding is murky. But I'll bet my paycheck that there are federal tax dollars in there somewhere. So, yeah, I'm helping to pay for it.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Question/Exclaimation marks, Percentage signs etc don't show up on the New Page.
Only once you go into the thread do the symbols appear.




posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: starviego

Your title is misleading--this isn't "gay-only housing," it's apparently housing with services designed to cater to gay people. I'm pretty sure that it states in the article itself that anyone can live there.

As for tax dollars helping build it--if it turns out that there is discrimination going on, that will be lawsuit hell for the city.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Why does every minority group yell that they want to be treated equally without being placed in a category, yet at every opportunity they separate themselves from other groups?
Had this been a white only, black only, Jewish only or straight only facility it would have been shot down long ago.
Nobody cares if your gay.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Why does every minority group yell that they want to be treated equally without being placed in a category, yet at every opportunity they separate themselves from other groups?
Had this been a white only, black only, Jewish only or straight only facility it would have been shot down long ago.
Nobody cares if your gay.


Good thing it's not "gay only" then, eh!



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Why does every minority group yell that they want to be treated equally without being placed in a category, yet at every opportunity they separate themselves from other groups?
Had this been a white only, black only, Jewish only or straight only facility it would have been shot down long ago.
Nobody cares if your gay.


Good thing it's not "gay only" then, eh!



Yeah ok.
So if it was designed to "cater" to straight people you would be fine with it?




top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join