Quantcast

Comments about ‘Poll: Utahns favor nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 21 2014 7:10 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Kings Court
Alpine, UT

So, I take that as 23% of Utah residents are in favor of discrimination. Nice people! I wonder if these folks were also the school bullies.

Bob K
portland, OR

The result of 72% being against discrimination shows the struggle of thought going on in Utah. I believe people want to be fair, but have a hard time to conceive going against the church.

The untruth that Gays are "suffering from the affliction of same sex attraction" tells them to choose between:
The untruth that Gays are "suffering from the affliction of same sex attraction" is necessary to keep up the pretense that they should choose between:
A- Straighten themselves out and marry opposite sex in the temple
or
B- Live without the love and companionship that their parents and siblings enjoy
or
C- Go against God's will and miss out on sainthood and a glorious afterlife

And notice that the article says small businesses will be exempted. Sorry, that is contrary to the Constitution. People in a protected class, such as the religious or Gays, should not have to worry about which store to try to shop in.

DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

That is assuming that "non-discrimination" means "all people are treated equally" not the perverted "all animals are equal but some are more equal" world where select "victim" classes suddenly become the oppressors.

Dr. Martin Luther King Day was only yesterday, but he would be appalled at how his work for equality has been twisted into a brave new world.

Tis to weep.

Ken
Sandy, UT

If I wanted a roommate in a house I own I absolutely would find a heterosexual roommate. Why? For the same reason I wouldn't get a female roommate. There are real privacy concerns that lead to males and females having separate locker rooms and restrooms. It's not bigotry to have males and females not sharing locker rooms or college dormitories(as most do). Similarly, it's not bigotry for someone to not want to share private living quarters with someone who may be attracted to them if those attractions aren't wanted.

Northern
Logan, UT

I live it when an article tells me what I think. Good thing I read this otherwise I wouldn't know what to think.

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.
Provo, UT

Kings Court,

If there is any bullying going on, it's people throwing that label at others so easily.

* Not favoring non-discrimination laws
* Personal feelings of prejudice

Draw a venn diagram where those intersect and you'll quickly see how someone can oppose such laws while not having personal feelings of prejudice. Slap "non-discrimination" on a headline and everyone cries bloody murder if you don't support it. However, one can support non-discriminatory behavior while also not supporting a non-discrimination law.

* Do I believe we should discriminate? No.
* Do I believe we should dictate to small business owners that they don't have a choice in who they hire? No.

Agree or not, that doesn't make me a bully.

Corey H
Salt Lake City, UT

If this bill becomes law, it will NOT apply to situations of a person looking for a roommate. Any landlord with four rental units or less, would be exempt. There are strong exemptions for religious employers and entities that include housing (BYU campus housing, for example would be exempt).

Kora
Cedar Hills, UT

Corey- is there an exemption for someone who owns a religious based business, for instance if I own an LDS Bookstore or Missionary clothing store do I have to hire homosexual individuals? Does this eliminate applications for home rentals? How do you prove discrimination? Is it automatic if a gay person does not get a house? When we moved to Utah I looked at a house for rent and the home owners had multiple interested parties. They chose to rent to another family instead of mine. If this happens to a gay couple will they be able to sue because they are gay and did not get the house? How can they prove it was because they were gay, and how does the home owner prove it was not because they were gay? People use multiple criteria when renting a home and hiring someone. In Utah, many times the reason they went in one direction versus another is because "they prayed about it". How do you deal with that in court and with this law? Do you tell people they are not allowed to pray about who they hire or rent to? If so, that is religious discrimination.

Lagomorph
Salt Lake City, UT

That the Sutherland Institute would resort to the red herring (or straw man, choose your metaphor) of public accommodations when the topic of the bill is employment and housing only points to the poverty of their ideas. They seem to be incapable of debating SB100 on its merits and have to resort to bathroom scaremongering and the "special rights" trope. The bill is patterned after nondiscrimination ordinances in effect in several Utah communities for several years. If the bill is as bad as they say, they should be able to point to numerous examples of problems in those communities. The relevant question is why a patchwork of existing protections in various localities should not be extended statewide. They have made no cogent argument against this.

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

@DN Subscriber
The non-discrimination ordinance would protect people from being fired just because they're straight too... if that situation were to ever actually come up.

@Ken
"It's not bigotry to have males and females not sharing locker rooms or college dormitories(as most do). "

I had a gay roommate my first year here. Didn't make one bit of difference.

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ Kora: The burden for proving discrimination is the same whether that discrimination is religious, gender, race, sexual orientation or anything else. This is not new territory.

As for religiously based businesses, that would depend on how religiously based they are and how big they are. Mr. Mac, for example, sells suits - those suits are available to anyone who would like to buy one, even the "missionary special" is available to non-missionaries and non-Mormons. Additionally, Mr. Mac has several stores and employs many people. Chances are, Mr. Mac would be subject to these non-discrimination laws. The LDS Distribution Center, on the other hand, is owned and operated by the Mormon Church, and they have very strict requirements that not only the employees must meet but the shoppers must meet as well. Although they employ numerous people, they are very obviously a religious business and would be exempt from this law.

And as long as the homosexual individual is doing their job and exhibiting proper workplace etiquette, why does who they date off the clock matter?

Corey H
Salt Lake City, UT

Kora, I tried to compose a comment that answers your questions, but the algorithm wouldn't accept what I typed. Grrr. Something about long sentences with non-wrapping text. I can't see how to answer the questions you asked, with out using the exact language of the bill. It APPEARS that a business such as you mentioned, would not be required to hire an LGBT person.

J. S.
Houston, TX

@ken,

Please read the actual bill before making any judgement.

just as Corey H said, this bill will NOT apply to situations of a person looking for a roommate. Any landlord with four rental units or less, would be exempt. There are strong exemptions for religious employers and entities that include housing (BYU campus housing, for example would be exempt).

so your argument is just another red herring.

Dominique*
SLC, UT

Kings Court said, "So, I take that as 23% of Utah residents are in favor of discrimination. Nice people! I wonder if these folks were also the school bullies."

Actually, not only were they the school bullies, they're the Utah Congress, making the laws. Those 23% can be found for 45 days up in the Utah Capitol

Flashback
Kearns, UT

Cake bakers and wedding photographers beware. There is ample federal law already on the books about such things. We don't need more. I know alot of homosexuals and have never heard from them of one instance where they got discriminated against in employment or housing. None.

Kora
Cedar Hills, UT

Maudie and Corey- there are many religious businesses that would not be protected under this law. This includes religious bookstores not run by a church, and stores such as Missionary Mall and CTR Missionary clothing. These businesses would be required to hire anyone.

Dominique- I suspect everyone favors some discrimination, just not against their particular group. Does this law protect the groups you may disagree with? If not, the law is discriminatory. It must protect the Neo Nazi and Aryan nation members as well as well as any other group in employment and renting or the discrimination continues. You can't decide to protect one group and not all in this law. We can't pick and choose who is going to be a protected class. So if a group of racists wants to rent a bunch of apartments at your complex, you must let them, especially if their racism is religious based as many of these groups claim. The same goes for hiring. And gay businesses will have to hire people who hate gays if they meet the standard job requirements.

With regards to bullying, if you discriminate against any of these groups, then you are a bully.

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ Kora: You are absolutely right - Missionary Mall and CTR Missionary clothing would be required to treat gay people as real people - just as they have to treat Catholics as real people.

To answer your question to Dominique - this law doesn't address religious or race discrimination - those are addressed under current non-discrimination laws. Yes - this law would apply to everyone. A gay-owned business with more than 15 employees wouldn't be able to fire someone just for being straight anymore than a straight-owned business with more than 15 employees would be able to fire someone just for being gay.

And a gay landlord with more than 4 rental units would not be able to evict someone just for being straight anymore than a straight landlord with more than 4 rental units would be able to evict someone just for being gay.

If the person being fired is not doing their job or if they are acting inappropriately, they can be fired the same as anyone else. And if a renter violates their lease, they can still be evicted.

We've been dealing with laws like this for 50 years now. We know how to do this.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments