The Ordinance (Post, Howe: apartments, reviews, cities)

[JuneOf48]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

Fair Housing Act, IIRC.....

The Fair Housing Act/Texas Fair Housing Act (TFHA) prohibits discrimination in housing because of:

• Race
• Religion
• Color
• Sex
• National Origin
• Disability
• Familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or legal custodians; pregnant women and people securing custody of children under 18).

It doesn't cover sexual orientation (and it doesn't even cover veteran status).

[JuneOf48]

Originally Posted by TrapperL

I'm sure we all have friends or acquaintances that are gay, I have. All this BS doesn't bother them but apparently there are those that arrogance and self importance is the most critical thing on their agenda. Like adding the word "orientation" to the list. How about sexual color? Or maybe sexual prowess? How about the well endowed ladies, I'm sure they would like recognition. This is a stupid word game. The word SEX as written in the Texas Constitution covers everything sexual. The word is SEX with no adjectives, none needed, none required.

In this context, "sex" means one of two things: "male" or "female." It has nothing to do with sexuality or sexual orientation.

Yes, I'm sure we all do have friends and family members who are gay. I'm glad your friends have never been fired or kicked out of their apartment because they are gay. Some haven't been as fortunate, and that's why this ordinance is needed.

[TexasRedneck]

Actually it does....but that doesn't fit your agenda, so why bother with the facts...

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

Actually it does....but that doesn't fit your agenda, so why bother with the facts...

I am not sure how accurate this wikipedia source is, so won't vouch for it, but it states:

"Sexual orientation and gender identity are not protected under the Fair Housing Act. This is because federal law does not protect gays and lesbians or other sexual minorities (transgender or transsexual) with discrimination in housing. There are fifteen states that have passed laws prohibiting discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The states that have passed fair housing laws in regards to sexual orientation and gender identity are: California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Vermont. In addition to the states above, the following five states prohibit discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation only: Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Wisconsin.[17] There are also cities that have passed laws making discrimination based on sexual orientation illegal. These are: Atlanta, Austin,[18] Chicago, Cincinnati, Columbus, Covington (KY), Denver, Detroit, Houston, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Seattle.[citation needed]

In 2012, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity issued a regulation to prohibit LGBT discrimination in federally-assisted housing programs. The new regulations ensure that the Department's core housing programs are open to all eligible persons, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity."

(so the federal law only applies to federally funded housing)

From Civil Rights Act of 1968 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I can't find anything in the actual act PROPERTY CODE**CHAPTER 301. TEXAS FAIR HOUSING ACT that addresses sexual orientation. "Sex" = male or female.

From this site: Texas Tenant Advisor

"Federal Fair Housing Act

The federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing because of:

* Race or 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 18)
* Disability

Sometimes city ordinances can provide more protection than the federal or state acts, so check with your city to find out what is covered. For example, the federal and state acts do not provide protection for discrimination based upon marital status or sexual orientation, but some cities in Texas might provide this protection in their ordinances."


And from HUD.gov (which I can presume to be a legitimate source):FH_LGBT_PAGE

"The federal Fair Housing Act prohibits housing discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, and familial status (i.e., presence of children in the household). The Fair Housing Act does not specifically include sexual orientation and gender identity as prohibited bases. However, a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) person's experience with sexual orientation or gender identity housing discrimination may still be covered by the Fair Housing Act. In addition, housing providers that receive HUD funding, have loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), as well as lenders insured by FHA, may be subject to HUD program regulations intended to ensure equal access of LGBT persons."

[rynetwo]

Discrimination is a bad business model period!

Why we are debating fair housing I have no idea. It just doesn't make sense to me that this is that big of an issue. As a white gay male living in San Antonio I have never been discriminated against except for when applying for student aid but that would be a whole new thread. I posed this question to my other friends in the circle and they have all said the same thing but then again they are all also white gay men. So are they being targeted because they are gay? Minority maybe? Fat and gay? Who knows because the only person who really knows would be the person doing the discrimination.

Why are people so opposed to a city ordnance that ban discrimination on sexual orientation? This ordinance says nothing about a person having to accept gays it simply says you cannot deny them a fair chance for being gay. (which means you can deny them for any other reason not covered you just have to be creative)

[prim8]

Originally Posted by TrapperL

I'm sure we all have friends or acquaintances that are gay, I have. All this BS doesn't bother them but apparently there are those that arrogance and self importance is the most critical thing on their agenda. Like adding the word "orientation" to the list. How about sexual color? Or maybe sexual prowess? How about the well endowed ladies, I'm sure they would like recognition. This is a stupid word game. The word SEX as written in the Texas Constitution covers everything sexual. The word is SEX with no adjectives, none needed, none required.

If it's not needed (according to you) and the protections are already there (according to you) why does it bother you and others so much that they add an ordinance that is more specific?

[JuneOf48]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

Actually it does....but that doesn't fit your agenda, so why bother with the facts...

You're just wrong about this, and it boggles my mind to see how impossible it is for some people to imagine that gay people don't have certain legal rights.

I don't have an "agenda." I'm not gay. I do have a sibling, though, who is gay. I got to grow up watching him being taunted in school; to see people write anti-gay slurs on the sidewalk in front of our house; to hear him tell me about getting "bashed," even when he was in his 30s, and even when he was alone and not "flaming." He's had a very, very hard life.

So yeah, maybe I do have a bit of an agenda. And yeah, it's pretty damn easy for me to believe stories about anti-gay discrimination, because I've seen them (and their results) with my own eyes.

[geargrinder70]

Originally Posted by JuneOf48

You're just wrong about this, and it boggles my mind to see how impossible it is for some people to imagine that gay people don't have certain legal rights.

I don't have an "agenda." I'm not gay. I do have a sibling, though, who is gay. I got to grow up watching him being taunted in school; to see people write anti-gay slurs on the sidewalk in front of our house; to hear him tell me about getting "bashed," even when he was in his 30s, and even when he was alone and not "flaming." He's had a very, very hard life.

So yeah, maybe I do have a bit of an agenda. And yeah, it's pretty damn easy for me to believe stories about anti-gay discrimination, because I've seen them (and their results) with my own eyes.

June, I'm sorry for your siblings problems, but a lot of people are harassed and abused for many different reasons like being the wrong color, gay, too short or too tall, too fat or too skinny, too this or too that, your the wrong religion or a million other stupid things. It's a very sad part of our human existence . So the big question is how can it be prevented, do we make a new law that addresses each type of discrimination? That would take a lot of laws. New laws will not stop discrimination or harassment unfortunately. I wish it could but it never will.

[TexasRedneck]

Juneof48, you don't know me - because if you did, you'd understand just how wrong your assertions are. You want to be on my bad side, deny someone something because of ANYTHING that makes them "different" - within reason. If you run a Christian school, I can understand not wanting an unwed mother as a teacher. If you run a bar that caters to blacks, I can see you not wanting to hire a skinhead with "white power" tats. The list goes on - what we have to remember is that in a FREE society, we're ALL free to follow our beliefs and hearts - not just those that are PC. With the passing of each of these laws, that freedom is being whittled away - not only for (insert whatever group you don't like here), but for (insert whatever group you do like here). THAT is the true danger hiding behind this kind of ordinance.

And let me fill you in on a little secret........pedophiles ARE watching this action with interest....

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

If you run a Christian school, I can understand not wanting an unwed mother as a teacher.

And a christian school CAN do that, provided it's stated in their policies prior to hiring (this is pretty common in Catholic schools). However, a PUBLIC school, one that receives tax payer funds, can not discriminate on such grounds.

This ordinance applies to those organizations that do business with the city.

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

The list goes on - what we have to remember is that in a FREE society, we're ALL free to follow our beliefs and hearts - not just those that are PC.

You are still free to follow those beliefs in private. This ordinance would prohibit you from discriminating based on those beliefs *if* you hold a city contract. If it is important to you to be able to discriminate, then you don't seek business with the city.

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

With the passing of each of these laws, that freedom is being whittled away - not only for (insert whatever group you don't like here), but for (insert whatever group you do like here). THAT is the true danger hiding behind this kind of ordinance.

Right, because see what happened when a law was enacted to protect the rights of women, to protect the rights of blacks, or those of any race?

Would you say that the current law, which does not allow you to refuse service to a black person, or an hispanic person, is dangerous?

Originally Posted by TexasRedneck

And let me fill you in on a little secret........pedophiles ARE watching this action with interest....

You know that how?

But since pedophilia is no more related to same-sex orientation than it is to heterosexual orientation, it is irrelevant.