'Blatant discrimination'

[Freewill]

'Blatant discrimination'

WORLD | 'Blatant discrimination' | Les Sillars | Sept. 12, 2012

When New York City announced last spring it intended to evict religious groups from public school facilities they rented for weekend services, churches fought back with a very public campaign. In June they won a court injunction against the city allowing the churches to stay, for now.

 

[Noomi]

That's not discrimination. The State of NY has every right to decide who can rent their facilities and who cannot. The churches need to get over themselves and set up elsewhere.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's not discrimination. The State of NY has every right to decide who can rent their facilities and who cannot. The churches need to get over themselves and set up elsewhere.

Actually, they don't. Thanks to a bunch of idiots that think that rights mean that people can impose their likes and dislikes on others the law clearly states that they have two choices. They can either rent their facilities to everyone, or not rent them at all. They are not allowed to pick and choose, and any attempt to exclude some groups without denying all groups access is discrimination.

We do thank you for once again demonstrating that people who live in Australia and comment on US politics aren't qualified to talk about Australian politics.

 

[Clementine]

That's not discrimination. The State of NY has every right to decide who can rent their facilities and who cannot. The churches need to get over themselves and set up elsewhere.

The state of NY allows Muslims to pray in the streets because the mosques don't have room for everyone. Streets get closed down and people have to detour to get to and from work. That quite an inconvenience for all, but it goes on. It shouldn't be any big deal for churches to rent facilities. Saying the state has the right to deny renting to certain people based on religion is discrimination. Landlords cannot discriminate who they rent to and the state shouldn't either.

 

[Noomi]

That's not discrimination. The State of NY has every right to decide who can rent their facilities and who cannot. The churches need to get over themselves and set up elsewhere.

Actually, they don't. Thanks to a bunch of idiots that think that rights mean that people can impose their likes and dislikes on others the law clearly states that they have two choices. They can either rent their facilities to everyone, or not rent them at all. They are not allowed to pick and choose, and any attempt to exclude some groups without denying all groups access is discrimination.

We do thank you for once again demonstrating that people who live in Australia and comment on US politics aren't qualified to talk about Australian politics.

Is this something that you agree with?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's not discrimination. The State of NY has every right to decide who can rent their facilities and who cannot. The churches need to get over themselves and set up elsewhere.

Actually, they don't. Thanks to a bunch of idiots that think that rights mean that people can impose their likes and dislikes on others the law clearly states that they have two choices. They can either rent their facilities to everyone, or not rent them at all. They are not allowed to pick and choose, and any attempt to exclude some groups without denying all groups access is discrimination.

We do thank you for once again demonstrating that people who live in Australia and comment on US politics aren't qualified to talk about Australian politics.

Is this something that you agree with?

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

 

[Noomi]

Actually, they don't. Thanks to a bunch of idiots that think that rights mean that people can impose their likes and dislikes on others the law clearly states that they have two choices. They can either rent their facilities to everyone, or not rent them at all. They are not allowed to pick and choose, and any attempt to exclude some groups without denying all groups access is discrimination.

We do thank you for once again demonstrating that people who live in Australia and comment on US politics aren't qualified to talk about Australian politics.

Is this something that you agree with?

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is this something that you agree with?

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

Does the government condone murder because they rent facilities to a book club that discusses mysteries? Does your brain do anything other than keep your ears from flapping against each other?

 

[Noomi]

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

Does the government condone murder because they rent facilities to a book club that discusses mysteries? Does your brain do anything other than keep your ears from flapping against each other?

That isn't the same thing and you know it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

Does the government condone murder because they rent facilities to a book club that discusses mysteries? Does your brain do anything other than keep your ears from flapping against each other?

That isn't the same thing and you know it.

The problem is that you don't understand that it is the same thing, just like the government allowing films like "Innocence of Muslims" to be made does not mean they condone idiocy. When you actually understand that you will be able to discuss politics with the adults in the world, until then you should only talk to teenagers.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Is this something that you agree with?

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

No, if they rent to the Boy Scouts, then they must rent to the KKK as long as both groups will fulfill their obligations as tenants. Under our Constitution, the government may not limit free speech unless it poses a threat to public safety and it may not limit anyone's right to practice his/her religion as long as those religious practices involve no illegal actions.

 

[Clementine]

Is this something that you agree with?

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

Did the federal government condone voter intimidation by allowing the new black panthers to stand outside of polling places with clubs and threaten people?

NYC allows Muslims to gather in the street and pray. People can't even drive through, so have to leave early to get to work. What do you think about that?

Why would you bring up the kkk when we are talking about churches? Either the cities rent facilities or not. There may be laws specifically against hate groups who commit hate crimes, but we aren't talking about either one here.

If the churches who rented the facilities were trashing the place or committing a crime, there would be just cause to deny them, but to do so simply because they are religious is sheer discrimination.

 

[October]

This story starts off about NYC then jumps up to Toronto. Let's take it one at a time.

In NYC, I agree the city can not discriminate against churches, any church.

In Toronto the case is more about charges going up for Church groups and not over other groups. I would need more information to determine if it is indeed discrimination or based on some other reason.

 

[FA_Q2]

That's not discrimination. The State of NY has every right to decide who can rent their facilities and who cannot. The churches need to get over themselves and set up elsewhere.

Epic fail. What do you thing the definition of discrimination is in the first place???

The government has no right to deny you rent or anything because of your religion. It is no different than the government saying you can’t rent this facility because you are black. And before you spout off with more of that ‘it’s different’ bullshit; it is not:
Protected class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Religion is a protected class in the same manner that color is. There is ZERO bases for denying facilities because they have a religious purpose in renting them.

Further, your KKK example is no different. As long as they were not doing anything illegal, they have the same full rights that anyone else has. Whether you ‘disagree’ or not is absolutely beside the question. You do not get to determine others rights because you disagree with them, no matter how unseemly they may be. The reality is that those you mostly disagree with are the ones that are in need of such protection. If we all agreed, there would be no need to protect your rights.

Now, the article is not about NY state though, it is about Toronto which leads me to ask the rather obvious question: did the OP even bother to read it? What is the point you are trying to get at. They are blatant BUT they are in different nations. Do you have a greater point here or a specific problem you want to point out?

The quote is about NY (as the article was relating it the Toronto situation) but the article is about CANADA. There exists an entirely different set of rules there so I don’t know about the legality here. It is still discriminatory though.

This story starts off about NYC then jumps up to Toronto. Let's take it one at a time.

In NYC, I agree the city can not discriminate against churches, any church.

In Toronto the case is more about charges going up for Church groups and not over other groups. I would need more information to determine if it is indeed discrimination or based on some other reason.

What more information do you need? What we have:
Churches are classified as non-profits
Non-profits are given special rental rates
Churches enjoyed that rate until recently when ONLY the rate for churches was changed – NOT the rate for other non-profits.

That is all we need to know in order to understand that the call is discriminatory. The move is to close a budget gap BUT they are singling out churches and ONLY churches to close the gap. That is a blatant case of discrimination as the OP puts it.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

Does the government condone murder because they rent facilities to a book club that discusses mysteries? Does your brain do anything other than keep your ears from flapping against each other?

LMAO!!! Hahahaha

 

[October]

That's not discrimination. The State of NY has every right to decide who can rent their facilities and who cannot. The churches need to get over themselves and set up elsewhere.

Epic fail. What do you thing the definition of discrimination is in the first place???

The government has no right to deny you rent or anything because of your religion. It is no different than the government saying you can’t rent this facility because you are black. And before you spout off with more of that ‘it’s different’ bullshit; it is not:
Protected class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Religion is a protected class in the same manner that color is. There is ZERO bases for denying facilities because they have a religious purpose in renting them.

Further, your KKK example is no different. As long as they were not doing anything illegal, they have the same full rights that anyone else has. Whether you ‘disagree’ or not is absolutely beside the question. You do not get to determine others rights because you disagree with them, no matter how unseemly they may be. The reality is that those you mostly disagree with are the ones that are in need of such protection. If we all agreed, there would be no need to protect your rights.

Now, the article is not about NY state though, it is about Toronto which leads me to ask the rather obvious question: did the OP even bother to read it? What is the point you are trying to get at. They are blatant BUT they are in different nations. Do you have a greater point here or a specific problem you want to point out?

The quote is about NY (as the article was relating it the Toronto situation) but the article is about CANADA. There exists an entirely different set of rules there so I don’t know about the legality here. It is still discriminatory though.

This story starts off about NYC then jumps up to Toronto. Let's take it one at a time.

In NYC, I agree the city can not discriminate against churches, any church.

In Toronto the case is more about charges going up for Church groups and not over other groups. I would need more information to determine if it is indeed discrimination or based on some other reason.

What more information do you need? What we have:
Churches are classified as non-profits
Non-profits are given special rental rates
Churches enjoyed that rate until recently when ONLY the rate for churches was changed – NOT the rate for other non-profits.

That is all we need to know in order to understand that the call is discriminatory. The move is to close a budget gap BUT they are singling out churches and ONLY churches to close the gap. That is a blatant case of discrimination as the OP puts it.

AS I said, in NYC it does indeed appear to be discrimination, but the case in Toronto may simply be another issue. I don't know why the city charges more for one group. I would like to know if they have a criteria they use for that, what their reasons are.

 

[CrazedScotsman]

All or none, it's as simple as that. Just like how Christians want Christianity taught in public schools but it isn't. If you have one religion taught then you have to have all religions taught and that includes Satanism. The city of New York can not tell anyone they can not rent a public space, even the KKK if they want to rent it. If they keep one group out, they must keep all groups out.

A while back, in the city of Cincinnati, the KKK liked to stir crap up and get a permit to erect a cross on Fountain Square during Christmas. The city tried to deny the group, but it is unconstitutional and the city has to comply. So now, to keep the KKK from putting a cross up on Fountain Square, the city doesn't allow anyone to put anything there at any time during the year. It's all or nothing and that's the way it should be.

 

[squeeze berry]

Is this something that you agree with?

When it comes to the government? Absolutely.

Hmm...not sure I agree though. I mean, what if the KKK wanted to hold a meeting? Wouldn't the government be condoning racism by allowing them to rent facilities?

they would be condoning racism if they didn't

BTW, since you are from down under.

You do realize there is very little KKK activity in this country.

I have never seen a KKK member