Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It doesn't. The case was dropped. I'm curious about the member of the congregation who started this all with a complaint though.
You are assuming this case was initiated by a "member of the congregation" when there is nothing to indicate that. The identity of who initiated the complaint has not been disclosed. Many are guessing that it was an outside trouble maker person or group going after the Christians. Doubtful that a Christian member of the Christian church would have a problem with the ad.
Anyhow, it will be taken to the higher court in order to get this ridiculous law off the books and prevent future expansion of it to include other groups. I heard of another such case a while back in the state of Wisconsin in which a single female looking for a roommate to share her home rejected a lesbian applicant. She was taken to court by the lesbian woman, who claimed discrimination. The woman trying to find a roommate was found guilty and forced to take some sort of class in antidiscrimination or tolerance training and write a letter of apology to the lesbian lady who won the court case.
I think these laws need to come off the books when it comes to people looking for a roommate to share their home with. They should be able to be as discriminatory as necessary in order to find the person they feel the most comfortable with. Now, a landlord renting out apts. or homes is a different case and I am in favor of the antidiscrimination laws in these situations. I believe that is who it was initially intended for.
This just seems like a road we simply do not want to start going down.
Here is the story, a woman pins a flier on her church's bulletin board, advertising for a "Christian roommate" to share her home with, and the state of Michigan cited her for violating the Fair Housing Act by discriminating against those of other faiths. This legislation was past in 1968, and was obviously put into place to prevent Realtors and and apartment landlords from excluding tenants based on racial and ethnic discrimination. but the state has taken it to a new level in my opinion.
I'm guessing this religious bigot of a woman is being charged with violating this section:
Chapter 2
(f) To publish or advertise, directly or indirectly, an intent to make a limitation, specification or discrimination based on race, color, religion or national origin.
(h) To make a record or inquiry in connection with a prospective real estate transaction which indicates the race, color, religion or national origin of a person. (i) To offer, solicit, accept, use or retain a listing of real property with the understanding that a person may be discriminated against in a real estate transaction or in the furnishing of facilities or services in connection therewith with respect to race, color, religion or national origin.
From the attorney representing the woman:
"Tricia is a single lady looking for a roommate. She is not a landlord. She does not own a management company. She does not run an apartment complex. She is a single person seeking to have a roommate live with her in her house," the letter said.
"She is not prohibited by either federal law or state law from seeking a Christian roommate. Neither Title VII of the US Fair Housing Civil Rights Act of 1968 nor the Elliot Larsen Civil Rights Act No. 453 prevents a woman like her from seeking a Christian roommate."
What do you guys think?
I think this is one of the dumbest things that I have seen in awhile. Good Lord, where has common sense gone???
After reading the OP's post, but not reading all the following posts. I think that the Michigan needs to take a Fair Housing class.
I was in property management in Colorado with a number of apartment complexes and had four homes and a condo that personally owned. I had to take a Fair Housing class under corporate procedure. In fact Fair Housing law suits are the number five lawsuit in the property management industry and a person has up to 6 years to file a complaint.
As that I fell under Fair Housing owning more then 3 dwellings I could not put an add focusing or prohibiting Race, Color, Religion, Sex, Handicap, Familial Status, or Nationality. If you go into a apartment management complex you will see the EHO poster.
However the limitations only reach to multiple home rentals. Such as myself who had four dwellings. But John who is moving in with his new wife and renting his old house dose not have to follow Fair Housing.
It is outside the scope of the fair housing act to control who chooses what type of person to have as a room mate.
Sec. 803. [42 U.S.C. 3603] Effective dates of certain prohibitions
b)Nothing in section 804 of this title (other than subsection (c)) shall apply to--
1) any single-family house sold or rented by an owner: Provided, That such private individual owner does not own more than three such single-family houses at any one time:
Something interesting for thought. Under the fair housing laws in an apartment complex setting if I clean the snow off a car of one resident, say an older person, I have to do it for every resident no matter their age
You are assuming this case was initiated by a "member of the congregation" when there is nothing to indicate that. The identity of who initiated the complaint has not been disclosed. Many are guessing that it was an outside trouble maker person or group going after the Christians. Doubtful that a Christian member of the Christian church would have a problem with the ad.
I got it from the first link posted in this thread: Christian roommate ad spurs action | WOOD TV8
"Haynes said the Fair Housing Center began investigating after someone in the congregation, who was offended, filed a complaint".
Quote:
Anyhow, it will be taken to the higher court in order to get this ridiculous law off the books and prevent future expansion of it to include other groups. I heard of another such case a while back in the state of Wisconsin in which a single female looking for a roommate to share her home rejected a lesbian applicant. She was taken to court by the lesbian woman, who claimed discrimination. The woman trying to find a roommate was found guilty and forced to take some sort of class in antidiscrimination or tolerance training and write a letter of apology to the lesbian lady who won the court case.
I don't think so. They basically said the law, as it stands, didn't apply.
I got it from the first link posted in this thread: Christian roommate ad spurs action | WOOD TV8
"Haynes said the Fair Housing Center began investigating after someone in the congregation, who was offended, filed a complaint".
I don't think so. They basically said the law, as it stands, didn't apply.
Sorry. I missed that about it being from someone in the congregation. That is, indeed, strange. Maybe just a personal vendetta.
In regard to this being taken to a higher court, if you read the first link I posted, it states that the attorney for the woman will be taking this to a higher court to get the original statute off the books because it violates constitutional rights. He doesn't want this to happen to anyone else even if the state is dropping the charges in this one case.
I don't see the fair housing as preventing that ad at all. Its just like adverise and only exscepting another male or female really.
But if you read the link, you will see that even though the case is being dropped, they seem to be doing so "out of the goodness of their heart!" So, good for the defendent's attorney who is taking this to a higher court to get this statute off the books entirely so it doesn't come up again as it has in the past to unfairly accuse some other unsuspecting citizen and try and usurp their individual rights. Government needs to get their noses out of our private homes.
It is NOT illegal to advertise the "type" of roommate you want (when they are sharing same living quarters).
HUD dismissed the complaint.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, good for the defendent's attorney who is taking this to a higher court to get this statute off the books entirely so it doesn't come up again as it has in the past to unfairly accuse some other unsuspecting citizen and try and usurp their individual rights. Government needs to get their noses out of our private homes.
