Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (1476)	1/18/2001 4:09:34 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

It has more to do with landlord rights. This provision is part of a gay rights bill passed about ten years ago. Previously, a landlord could deny housing to anyone for any reason. If a hetero couple showed up and the landlord thought they were party animals, he could deny on the spot. Still can. If a homosexual couple shows up, he can't deny. The homosexual couple can immediately appeal any rejection to a state discrimination board.

To: Lane3 who wrote (1476)	1/18/2001 4:52:50 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Since homosexuals cannot be married they could always be discriminated against as an unmarried gay couple- could they not? There is no way for them to be protected. The unmarried hetero couple can marry- they are not forced to change their sexual orientation or dump their partner in order to find accommodation. The comparison is very helpful- and quite distinguishable. I think Ebill's state should permit gays to marry- then I think it would be perfectly acceptable to discriminate between married and non-married anybodies. Unless marital status is a protected class in your states constitution.