Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: Hodar; TheBigIf
Your statement of refusing to rent an apartment that can accomodate 12+ adults to a mixture of genders is simply a way of you forcing yourself into the bedroom.

Ah, you've shifted arguments from some kind of inconsistent legal angle ("whatever is legal or illegal is OK 'cause after all, the government's going to decide that" -- and then infuse that position into arbitrary public policy of 15 vs. 14 employees & 4 vs. 3 a moral angle)

You understand, Hodar, don't you, that when you start arguing morality you can't back up & then say, "Well, I wasn't talking about private behavior" -- because morality is morality no matter where's enacted or ignored.

Let's say your adult 18 yo daughter wants to bring her boyfriend home to sleep in her bed overnight. Now never mind the legalities of what legal right you have as a homeowner here -- 'cause we'll both agree on the legalities ... but see now you've entered the moral realm ... how consistent are you on your morality? Would you or I as a father be "forcing" ourselves into our 18 yo daughter's bedroom (if we had one, that is), by clamping down on that activity?

What about any adult children of yours? OK for them to bring over any old partner(s) to sleep in your house when they come visit? Are us "old-fashioned" people who say "no" to that simply "forcing" ourselves into bedrooms just because we don't want our homes converted into bordellos? (After all, with many sleeping arrangements, it's not just $'s often security, conveniences of other kinds, maybe getting ahead at the workplace, etc.)

Besides, I'm sure your "forcing yourself into the bedroom of your tenants" conclusion would have won over the hundreds of thousands of landlords' homes & offices in the...
1920s, etc.
telling them all, "Hey you're refusal to rent a room or multiple rooms or a place out back or a home to shacking-up couples = you just trying to force yourself into their bedroom."

(Hey, what's you're next argument...that landlords who won't rent to renters with a history of making meth labs -- even if they say they're now "clean" of that -- are "forcing their way into the potential 'at-home science experiments of renters?")

The reality is that freedom of conscience is closely rooted to freedom of association. And this is where I agree with TheBigIf re: your tendency toward, any Christian, Mormon or any other Bible-believer who takes seriously 1 Timothy 5:22 & fleshes it out in their business decisions ( not share in the sins of others) is deemed by you to be someone who should be fined $1,000.

And see, that's where I'm consistent principle-wise: What would apply to my own daughter (minus any "discrimination" thank you -- in that I don't want to knowingly & intentionally sanction a sinful lifestyle) I don't want to apply to a potential renter who's shacking up, regardless of what "sexual orientation" they are. (And this is where the tyrannical government is stepping in & saying, "No, you can't consider the morality of others' behavior.")

32 posted on 12/16/2009 1:24:29 PM PST by Colofornian (If you're not going to drink the coffee, at least wake up and smell it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Colofornian
Let's say your adult 18 yo daughter wants to bring her boyfriend home to sleep in her bed overnight.

Well, the first response is "my house, my rules".

If she were renting a room from you (or anyone else) my feelings would be completely different. Would I be happy she was briging her boyfriend home? No. But, I would be having words with anyone who took it upon themselves to interfere with an adult decision, made by consenting adults. What she does, as an adult, is her business. Whether we like what she does or not; really is none of our business.

Now, I would definitely try to disuade this sort of behavior; but depending upon the circumstances, you are forced to make a series of moral decisions. If she's 25 and living with her boyfriend, you are faced with the choice of being involved in her life, or alienating yourself.

But, the fact remains that by refusing to provide a service to others, based upon YOUR morality is inherently wrong. As for the Meth labs, I believe you can deny them access to your property based upon their criminal history, just as you could deny renting to someone with a horrible record of paying their rent, destroying past rental properties or other such applicable criminal activity.

However, being 'Gay' is not a criminal activity. And this is the crux of the matter; you are insisting upon denying someone the right to live in a publically available domicile, based not upon their ability to pay the rent, or upon criminal history, but upon thier sexual preference.

Now, there are gay people who chose to be chaste (ie. some Priests - granted,not a majority), and there are some hetero-sexuals who may have effinate characteristics. Bottom line, do you KNOW they are gay, or do you suspect they might be? Based upon your feelings and intuition, you would espouse to deny them the right to live where they chose.

We are not talking about anyone forcing their way into your home; we are talking about denying a segment of our population the right to live where they want.

As for bringing up 1 Timothy 5:22; if the Koran had a verse that stated the exact opposite, would you quote that? If you can use the Bible to form law, then the Islamist is free to do the same with the Koran. Hence my statment that neither be used.

The laws exist to enable society to function as a whole, without fragmenting society.

Now would our society be 'better off' if marriage was required in order to permit cohabbitation? Probably yes. But the fact of the matter is that this is not the case.

35 posted on 12/16/2009 1:48:14 PM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson