Hey folks, you are not ALLOWED to decide who your roommate is.

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   
I can't believe this actually made the news
but hey, controversy sells eh?

Not only should one be allowed to choose who they want to be a roommate is one should also be allowed to advertise it.

I will admit though that the fact that she is renting and has a landloard does complicate things.

But what percentage will she be paying vs. her roommate? Not always 50/50.

I am not fond of the thread title, not at all actually
It sounds so much like "Hey Folks, You are not ALLOWED to decide who you can marry"

Why don't people get it... the govt. is NOT your father or mother, stop trying to outsource parenthood to the govt.!!!!!

Let people be their own people!!!!!!!!!!!

It's like some of the people just want to move in with that woman and heckle her for her beliefs, and only for that purpose.
It's so ridiculous, come one persons......... Can I call you a person?
Or are you not an individual and therefore do not accept other people's individualism???




posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
wrong forum post
edit on 25-10-2010 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Reply to post by Misoir
 


It is not a fact. Both sides claim the same thing of each other.

I have left the right-left paradigm a long time ago.

Start looking for right and wrong. Not right and left. And always err on the side of freedom.

Have a good day.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Ok, so getting back on target....

I am not Christian by any means and I see nothing wrong with an advert like that. Renting a room is one thing, but this is someone who is sharing the common spaces of the house. People have a right to choose who they want in their house. People (not corporations, although, as I understand, there is no legal differance anymore :@@
should be allowed to pick who they want to live with them and advertise as such.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
how could anyone feign surprise at this? This is common knowledge. IF you are renting a room, you can't discriminate. that means 'differentiate'.

I can't say i particularly support the law. Clearly it creates abrsurd problems like this one, but i am aware it exists, and can see the rationale behind it, since clearly one must draw the line somewhere if you are going to draw a line.

Don't like the law? Work to change it. But dont feign surprise and indignation when you run up against it.


i was looking at renting a home many years back, and the young, new home-owner told me he didn't want young kids (i had a youngin'). I respected and understood his reasoning. Bu ti also told him that, technically, he can't do that. Not that i cared, but because someone else might, which would suck for. him. he seemed appreciative for the tip.
edit on 25-10-2010 by justadood because: spling



Edited o add: also, this headline is misleading. you can choose. you can choose between one person or another. but you cant actively discriminate against one group or for one group.

but clearly you can choose, unless you only have one option.
edit on 25-10-2010 by justadood because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Religion we do not need.

Religion is a cancer that must be cured.

Its place, belongs only in the minds of brainwashed individuals.

The mind of fools.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   
If it was on the church bulletin board, did she need to advertise that she preferred a christian roommate?


Regardless, property rights first, offended sensibilities second.



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Well, I have been thinking of starting a business and I am going to put a huge sign out front saying-

Absolutely no Totalitarians Allowed.


This includes all Democrats and Republicans that do not follow the tenets of the Constitution.

Do not like it, go somewhere else.

What is WRONG with that?

Oh, I am hurting your rights am I? Do you have the right to force someone to A) sell you something or B) give you something or C) allow you to enter their private property?

Some stores require you join their membership. This site requires you follow their rules. Boo hoo, religion, ethics and beliefs are NOT a race or ethnic thing, they are NOT something you can pick people out of the crowd on. This gets to the argument of freedom. Period. Forcing others to acquiesce to your beliefs or your convictions is not your right.

Let me put it this way, think of Balrog as tyrants that want to make all of us follow their beliefs-

You CANNOT PASS!






edit on 25-10-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


The problem with a sign that reads 'no totalitarians' will usually mean they will come in anyways due to not understanding what the term means. In addition you must please alert us of exactly what you mean by totalitarian?



posted on Oct, 25 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Well, see that is where the discussion begins.

Did you hear about the dentist or doctor in Florida that put up a sign that said No One that voted for Obama will be served here? Of course that will not stop people that did, but it gets the idea across.

Let us say I am a smoker and allow smoking in my store, then someone comes and whines that it smells like smoke in here and then sees someone smoking. They get all uppity and start whining. I would then point them at the sign and say, SEE no Totalitarians allowed.

Being that even though you are open to the public coming in, the line between private and public rights are to be observed. If the public person does not like something, they can LEAVE.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 12:00 AM
link   
Fact of the matter is, that as the home owner, the owner may decide whom may reside in his/her quarters. You have to look at the bigger picture! Who pays the mortgage on the property? Who pays the taxes? With just those to questions presented, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who has the say so on whom may stay at the residence.

If you were the home owner, and you had children, would you advertise for the nearest child molester? No! You would advertise a specific type of person. ( hopefully if you had kids you wouldn't be in that situation to begin with, having a stranger around your kids, but you just never know)

The people do not have the right to not be offended! Case Closed~



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Yes, this can be a sticky subject.

I believe the case for restrictions for race and ethnicity to be okay.

What I do not like is all the other PC crap flying around now. So let us say I am hiring, can I ask if the person is here in this country legally? NOOOOO, I cannot.

Let us say I wanted to hire some folk and I do not like socialists and communists? You know the type, those that think they deserve to run the company and share in the profits of the company. You know like GM and Chrysler. Can I ask that? NOOOO, I cannot.

I think people that run a company, sale or many other things, should and DO have the right not to hire or whatever, to those they have differences with, based upon almost EVERYTHING. Not race or ethnicity though.

Sorry, I must be a big bad meany if I think that if you OWN something, you have the right to do with it what you will.

This PC and government control crap is becoming communist. Telling you what you can do with your own property. Now, there are those out there that believe that the government should own everything. They sugar coat by saying it is socialism and it is the people owning the rights of production. That is bull. Who is going to enforce that? Always comes down to the government and central control. Amazing isn't it, when you start thinking about EVERYTHING the government sticks it's nose into.

Almost like you do not REALLY own your own property or self.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Why shouldnt a business owner retain the right to decide who to hire or not hire due to race or ethnicity?

It's their business, their capital, their property, and they shoulder the risk of their business thriving or failing. Why should the government have the power to dictate hiring procedures?

Where is that power derived from?



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 03:02 AM
link   
So if she were to advertise that she was looking for a "like minded" roommate would it still be illegal? At the end of the day that is exactly what we are talking about. The women advertised looking for someone who believes as she does in regards to religion. However she did not advertise on Craigslist or in the newspaper, she advertised AT A CHURCH where she was expecting to find a person like minded. It is her right to do as she pleases within her own home. It seems obvious to me that if you were to decide to share living quarters with someone else, it would be perfectly reasonable that you would want to be able to get along with the other person. If you are a person who lives a "healthy" lifestyle it can be easy to see how sharing your home with a crack head could cause some problems.

Sorry but this is retarded. Any attorney who would bring this before a judge should be disbarred and have his license to practice law revoked.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by BigTimeCheater
 


I know, I know, I know.

I am usually not a stickler for that but compromise has to be reached. Just not much give or take.

Now, on the other hand you have the mandates and such. Those should be eliminated.

Hey, if you have had employment hiring training lately, you would know about the myriad things you cannot ask. This does not mean you cannot hire who you want.

Anyway, I get your point.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2Rotten4u
Fact of the matter is, that as the home owner, the owner may decide whom may reside in his/her quarters. You have to look at the bigger picture! Who pays the mortgage on the property? Who pays the taxes? With just those to questions presented, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who has the say so on whom may stay at the residence.

If you were the home owner, and you had children, would you advertise for the nearest child molester? No! You would advertise a specific type of person. ( hopefully if you had kids you wouldn't be in that situation to begin with, having a stranger around your kids, but you just never know)

The people do not have the right to not be offended! Case Closed~


ABSOLUTELY WRONG! You may not agree, but discrimination is not allowed under the Fair Housing Act.

www.hud.gov...


Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act), as amended, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability)


As far as the OP is concerned, they could have a case in that the dwelling is owner occupied and less than four units. Overall though, you simply cannot discriminate. Civil Rights Act people!
edit on 10/26/2010 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by yadda333

Originally posted by 2Rotten4u
Fact of the matter is, that as the home owner, the owner may decide whom may reside in his/her quarters. You have to look at the bigger picture! Who pays the mortgage on the property? Who pays the taxes? With just those to questions presented, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who has the say so on whom may stay at the residence.

If you were the home owner, and you had children, would you advertise for the nearest child molester? No! You would advertise a specific type of person. ( hopefully if you had kids you wouldn't be in that situation to begin with, having a stranger around your kids, but you just never know)

The people do not have the right to not be offended! Case Closed~


ABSOLUTELY WRONG! You may not agree, but discrimination is not allowed under the Fair Housing Act.

www.hud.gov...


Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act), as amended, prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability)


As far as the OP is concerned, they could have a case in that the dwelling is owner occupied and less than four units. Overall though, you simply cannot discriminate. Civil Rights Act people!
edit on 10/26/2010 by yadda333 because: (no reason given)


Considering that addiction is now treated as a disease and thus can be seen as a disability, can someone not be allowed to ask for their roommate to be a non-smoker?

I mean, that's clear discrimination against us with a severe addiction to nicotine!



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 11:55 AM
link   
I'd like to put the boot on the other foot again.

Suppose I was looking for a room and saw, let's say, six advertisements from people looking for a room-mate.

I investigate all the advertisers and find that they are six very different people - one of whom has a lot in common with me.

So I decide to live with the person most like myself. The other five people, as far as I know, can't then sue me for not viewing their properties or wanting to live with them.

It's just daft that the person who wants to rent out the room can't state any sort of preference and save themselves the bother of having to put off a person they find undesirable. And risk being sued if they can't make a spurious reason for not wanting to share with the said undesirable stick.
edit on 26-10-2010 by berenike because: tidy up post



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
this is very sad, indeed. She only wanted someone she could trust and feel comfortable with and who shared her faith to live with her either to share expenses or just share their company so she wouldn't be lonely.

What is even sadder is the fact that she posted this in her CHURCH and someone in that church decided to cause trouble for her. Not very "christian" or "church-like" behavior for the person attending that church but maybe they are a "work in progress" and havn't turned from their heathen ways yet!


I bet that church is abuzz with lots of gossiping hens this week.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by yadda333
 


Fortunately discrimination is still very easy, just under different wording.

As it rightly should be, especially to maintain private property rights which trump the easily hurt feelings of others.
edit on 26-10-2010 by BigTimeCheater because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join