The fact that "they’re much less likely to be parents and twice as likely to be single and live alone,” is a predictable result of their life choices.
The vast majority of people in that age range still know that homosexuality is sinful and they especially hate it when it is flaunted in front of their faces.
When did it become acceptable to bully an organization into changing their values or service promise to counter their very core values? This is an attack on capitalism more than anything else. Private entities (people and businesses) have every right to associate with whomever they wish, and they should not be forced to associate with entities who do not espouse their own values.
This is soft tyranny, IMO, and it needs to be stopped. Freedom of association is ensconced in the first amendment. There’s no “right” to be allowed to associate with someone who does not wish to be your associate.
I’m pretty sure housing discrimination against homos is against the law.
Sounds like a set up.
No, they are not married.
The headline deliberately omits the “L” word, so we will read the article. Can’t fool me.
The retirement community has the right to keep them out. I smell a lawsuit coming.
When did LGBT become L.G.B.T.? Do we get thrown in jail for not putting in the periods? How about if I do it in the “wrong” order, like TGLB? Is that a misdemeanor hate crime?
As with so many similar cases, no one else needed to have the social undersides of those two women shoved in their faces. No one else needs to be the object of recruiting or solicitations for approval of those...activities.
The problem I have with this is that the community initially recruited them and offered incentive for them to move there.
They made plans accordingly.
Just bake the dammed cake!....Oh wait.
Well, as jojo biden would say: “One word. ‘The Villages in Florida’.”
If they are married, where are their husbands?
If you bring the $$$, they will always let you in.
This is another Gay Mafia attack
Why can’t they just return to the Lutheran community, which was apparently prepared to welcome them?
A woman-woman couple less likely to be parents??
I recall something in basic biology classes about reproduction of humans ...
One must note that the constitution protects every citizen’s right to discriminate. Harassment is legal until it’s not. And it can be a subjective call.
There’s always the isle of Lesbos.
Bfl
“If either Mary or Beverly were a man, the couple wouldn’t have been denied housing,” Ms. Wilensky said.
Yes, but if they were both men they’d be denied too, so where’s the sex discrimination?
We have Freedom of Religion, not freedom of Worship as the left likes to call it, thus limiting us to worship in church then leave it there.
Sorry NYeT. No sympathy here for alphabet freaks.
>>>The community seemed eager to recruit them, too, offering a lower entrance fee if they signed an agreement promptly. So they paid a $2,000 deposit on a two-bedroom unit costing $235,000<<<
They paid the money requested so this is a Contracted Agreement. They met the Financial terms dictated to them.
How can they be turned away without the Facility being held liable for violating the terms of the Contract?