Student Sues Professor

Stephanie wrote: On the other hand, if Cato's policy is to discriminate against homosexuals, I don't think he should be eligible to participate in section 8 housing, nor do I think he should be able to receive any government subsidized loans or receive any grants for improving his property. The government shouldn't condone discrimination nor should they enable it.

And I agree with you, if I want to choose who I rent or sell to then I certainly shouldn't get any government money. That is why I would never accept any government, because there are strings attached. Strings I don't agree with nor want attached to anything I happen to do.

Actually, you make a good case for why the government should in no way be involved.

Prove you are not a phony hypocrite, ...... buy a really nice house or apartment and then rent it to a family of scumbags.

I'm not in the renting business, Sammy. The fact is, though, that gays are likely to treat that apartment better that your average hetero, and you know it.

You stated, that you did like having you tax dollars going to faith based organizations, I don't much like being forced to rent or provide healthcare coverage to groups whose choices I disagree and actually loath. You say you support the politicans that have created this, then you are supporting the very people who are more than willing to use foce to make both you and I accept policy for which we disagree.

Willy, when people like you are willing to deny someone rights that they take for themselves, you are damn right I support the use of force.

If I want to live in a town and a bunch of discriminatory bigots tried to keep me out, I would be temped to use that force, personally.

You don't like gays. You want them to stay hidden so you can pretend they don't exist.

If I suggested you christians do the same, I doubt you would feel kindly about it.

At least we now know the color of your stripes, tiger. I'll bet you would have though that anti-lynching laws were "liberal" and "anti-liberty".

Yep, you are right I would not rent or sell a house to a homosexual couple. If I were an employer I would not provide healthcare to the partner of a homosexual employee. If that makes me a homophobe so be it. I apply the very same principles to an adulterous couple, so I guess I'm an adulteraphobe also. I also apply the same principles to welfare mommies, be they black, white, hispanic, so I guess that makes me a welfarephobe also.

No, you are just a judgmental bigot and a stupid one, at that.

What if you rented to a gay person but didn't know it, then later found out? You going to find any way you can to run them out?

If a gay couple offered you more than market value and you turned it down because you don't "approve" of the gay lifestyle, you are not hitting on all cylinders.

It's OK, Willy. My dad didn't like darkies and I managed to respect him even as I felt bad for him.

And I agree with you, if I want to choose who I rent or sell to then I certainly shouldn't get any government money. That is why I would never accept any government, because there are strings attached. Strings I don't agree with nor want attached to anything I happen to do.

So you will be returning those social security checks when they come in...

TerryRC wrote:And I agree with you, if I want to choose who I rent or sell to then I certainly shouldn't get any government money. That is why I would never accept any government, because there are strings attached. Strings I don't agree with nor want attached to anything I happen to do.

So you will be returning those social security checks when they come in...

Grasping at straws again Terry? Let's at least compare apples to apples.

You: That is why I would never accept any government [money (I assume)]...

Me: So you will be returning those social security checks when they come in...

Grasping at straws? Is that what we call it when someone uses our exact words against us? Is that the name for it, these days?

Just sayin'.

TerryRC wrote:

No, you are just a judgmental bigot and a stupid one, at that.

What if you rented to a gay person but didn't know it, then later found out? You going to find any way you can to run them out?

Yes, I would ask them to leave and I would cancel our agreement.

TerryRC wrote:If a gay couple offered you more than market value and you turned it down because you don't "approve" of the gay lifestyle, you are not hitting on all cylinders.

Money is not everything. If one cannot stand for their principles, then they are nothing, no matter how much money the accumulate.

Yes, I would ask them to leave and I would cancel our agreement.

And if everyone did that, where would they live?

If there were enough Willys in this country, gays would have no jobs and no homes. Thus the need for anti-discrimination laws. Like gays or not, they are citizens and have the same rights as you.

You are guilty of the "not in my backyard" syndrome.

Money is not everything. If one cannot stand for their principles, then they are nothing, no matter how much money the accumulate.

What principles - that gays aren't good enough to buy your house or live on your street?

When did the denying of basic rights to a group become a "principle"?

TerryRC wrote:You: That is why I would never accept any government [money (I assume)]...

Me: So you will be returning those social security checks when they come in...

Grasping at straws? Is that what we call it when someone uses our exact words against us? Is that the name for it, these days?

Just sayin'.

If it comes down to sacrificing my principles, for money or for populatity, my principles comes first. The one thing I've learned over the past few years especially, is that very few people ever actually stand up for what they believe, in the face of adversity. 95% of people can be bought, some for a few bangles and some are a bit more expensive. We this is politics and in business. We also see it in many personal lives.

Be you Christian, Atheist, Agnostic, Buddist, Wiccan, or whatever, the one truth is that we come into this world naked and with nothing and we leave it the same way. It isn't what you have accumulated or or just how tolerant you've been, how popular you are, it is the principles you stood for, especially when those principles were tested that really matters. Many times that means we travel a path that is hard and we have to make choices that are hard. The thing tha tis constant in the country especially, is that most are willing to make hard decisions, instead opting to go with the flow.

TerryRC wrote:Money is not everything. If one cannot stand for their principles, then they are nothing, no matter how much money the accumulate.

What principles - that gays aren't good enough to buy your house or live on your street?

When did the denying of basic rights to a group become a "principle"?

Where is it written that housing is a basic right?

Homosexuality is wrong in my book. Nothing changes that and I will do nothing give any appearance that I condone homosexual relationships.

Cato wrote:

TerryRC wrote:

No, you are just a judgmental bigot and a stupid one, at that.

What if you rented to a gay person but didn't know it, then later found out? You going to find any way you can to run them out?

Yes, I would ask them to leave and I would cancel our agreement.

So your "agreement" to something or other has no meaning? One party to an agreement (or contract) cannot arbitrarily "cancel" that agreement, not legally.

If it comes down to sacrificing my principles, for money or for populatity, my principles comes first. The one thing I've learned over the past few years especially, is that very few people ever actually stand up for what they believe, in the face of adversity. 95% of people can be bought, some for a few bangles and some are a bit more expensive. We this is politics and in business. We also see it in many personal lives.

Be you Christian, Atheist, Agnostic, Buddist, Wiccan, or whatever, the one truth is that we come into this world naked and with nothing and we leave it the same way. It isn't what you have accumulated or or just how tolerant you've been, how popular you are, it is the principles you stood for, especially when those principles were tested that really matters. Many times that means we travel a path that is hard and we have to make choices that are hard. The thing tha tis constant in the country especially, is that most are willing to make hard decisions, instead opting to go with the flow.

So you will be sending the social security checks back... ?

Where is it written that housing is a basic right?

Homosexuality is wrong in my book. Nothing changes that and I will do nothing give any appearance that I condone homosexual relationships.

The right to purchase or rent, to engage in commerce is a basic right. There are, of course, the unenumerated rights, also.

Regardless, you would try and break a written contract. So much for your belief in capitalism. Assuming you did that, there is this problem which you ignored.

And if everyone did that, where would they live?

If there were enough Willys in this country, gays would have no jobs and no homes. Thus the need for anti-discrimination laws. Like gays or not, they are citizens and have the same rights as you.

If you own a grocery store, will you deny them the right to buy food? If there are too many like-minded people, you will starve them.

Like I said, people like you have forced the need for anti-discrimination laws.

It is sad that you don't think a group of people are worthy to live as you do.

Scary, also.

ziggy wrote:

So your "agreement" to something or other has no meaning? One party to an agreement (or contract) cannot arbitrarily "cancel" that agreement, not legally.

Boy are you people ever grasping for straws. I have written my share of agreements in my life. I put two items in an agreement. The first is a performace clause. In that clause it states my expectations and conditions for a continuing agreement. I place a time frame to correct deficiecies and a result if deficiencies are corrected. Secondly, I require either a 30 or 60 day termination clause without reason, where either party can notify the other in writing of their intent to terminate the agreement. I do not do long term agreements, without an out.

TerryRC wrote:
If it comes down to sacrificing my principles, for money or for populatity, my principles comes first. The one thing I've learned over the past few years especially, is that very few people ever actually stand up for what they believe, in the face of adversity. 95% of people can be bought, some for a few bangles and some are a bit more expensive. We this is politics and in business. We also see it in many personal lives.

Be you Christian, Atheist, Agnostic, Buddist, Wiccan, or whatever, the one truth is that we come into this world naked and with nothing and we leave it the same way. It isn't what you have accumulated or or just how tolerant you've been, how popular you are, it is the principles you stood for, especially when those principles were tested that really matters. Many times that means we travel a path that is hard and we have to make choices that are hard. The thing tha tis constant in the country especially, is that most are willing to make hard decisions, instead opting to go with the flow.

So you will be sending the social security checks back... ?

If the choice is rent or sell property to people whom I choice not to or not send my check back. I'll be sending it back.

You do understand of course you are comparing apples to oranges here. Social Security is fund I have been forced to pay into for retirement. It has nothing to do with receiving tax money to build housing for rent or sale.

Boy are you people ever grasping for straws. I have written my share of agreements in my life. I put two items in an agreement. The first is a performace clause. In that clause it states my expectations and conditions for a continuing agreement. I place a time frame to correct deficiecies and a result if deficiencies are corrected. Secondly, I require either a 30 or 60 day termination clause without reason, where either party can notify the other in writing of their intent to terminate the agreement. I do not do long term agreements, without an out.

Better check with a lawyer. I suspect your contract is illegal.

Generally a lease or rental agreement is for a fixed term (e.g. one year), which means that the Landlord and Tenant are contractually bound for the duration of the lease term—the Tenant must continue paying rent and the Landlord must continue to allow the occupancy of the premises for the entire term of the lease.

and:

A landlord may legally terminate a lease if a tenant significantly violates its terms or the law -- for example, by paying the rent late, keeping a dog in violation of a no-pets clause in the lease, substantially damaging the property, or participating in illegal activities on or near the premises, such as selling drugs.

Unless you have an anti-gay clause (which is likely illegal) you are bound just as much as the tenant.

Address the question, I asked willy, if every business owner refused to do business with gays, how would they live?

You don't really care, do you.

You do understand of course you are comparing apples to oranges here. Social Security is fund I have been forced to pay into for retirement. It has nothing to do with receiving tax money to build housing for rent or sale.

You should be more specific, then, when you say you wouldn't take government money.

Don't blame me for your lack of precision in communication.

TerryRC wrote: Where is it written that housing is a basic right?

Homosexuality is wrong in my book. Nothing changes that and I will do nothing give any appearance that I condone homosexual relationships.

The right to purchase or rent, to engage in commerce is a basic right. There are, of course, the unenumerated rights, also.

That is true and I have the right to choose who I do business with.

TerryRC wrote:Regardless, you would try and break a written contract. So much for your belief in capitalism. Assuming you did that, there is this problem which you ignored.

As I just told Ziggy, I have written my share of agreements in my life, some for large chunks of property. I do include performance clauses and as I told Ziggy, I also include a 30 or 60 day termination clause where one party can notify the other in writing of their intent to cancel without fault. I never lease or agree anything long term.

TerryRC wrote:And if everyone did that, where would they live?

We all make choices in our lives and those choices have both rewards and consequences. I guess the reality we have have think about the results of our choices.

TerryRC wrote:If there were enough Willys in this country, gays would have no jobs and no homes. Thus the need for anti-discrimination laws. Like gays or not, they are citizens and have the same rights as you.[/i]

The reality is that there isn't and never will be for one. Where ever there is a market there will be someone there to fill it. That is also called choice. It is jsut not going to be me doing it

TerryRC wrote:If you own a grocery store, will you deny them the right to buy food? If there are too many like-minded people, you will starve them.

B***S*** Terry, growup!!! You can read can't you? I have never ever remotely made a comment like you are now accusing me of. I choose not to do or be involved in anything that condones their lifestyle. As I have said I will work with them, I will treat them with the same amount of respect they treat me, I will help them if I can, but I WILL NOT EVER BE INVOLVED IN ANY ACTIVITY THAT CONDONES THEIR LIFESYTLE.

TerryRC wrote:Like I said, people like you have forced the need for anti-discrimination laws.

It is sad that you don't think a group of people are worthy to live as you do.

Scary, also.

No what you really mean is that it is sad that I won't bow to you views, so you produce this off the wall arguement when you seek to make me a NAZI or their equilivent. Your comments are really invalid and are now beginning to show a tad of desperation.

As I just told Ziggy, I have written my share of agreements in my life, some for large chunks of property. I do include performance clauses and as I told Ziggy, I also include a 30 or 60 day termination clause where one party can notify the other in writing of their intent to cancel without fault. I never lease or agree anything long term.

And as I told you, you'd better have a lawyer check it. Your contract is likely not legal.

No what you really mean is that it is sad that I won't bow to you views, so you produce this off the wall arguement when you seek to make me a NAZI or their equilivent. Your comments are really invalid and are now beginning to show a tad of desperation.

You are the one writing in big red letters, not I.

I'm not asking you to bow to my views, the COTUS is. It allows for equal protection, under the law.

The reality is that there isn't and never will be for one. Where ever there is a market there will be someone there to fill it. That is also called choice. It is jsut not going to be me doing it

The reality is that gays need food, jobs and housing. You will personally refuse to allow them any of that. You also don't care that others do.

You are saying "let them starve and live on the streets".

How christian of you.

You say that being gay is their choice. Is being straight your choice, or were you born that way?

Regardless, you are the one becoming desperate. You might have to actually acknowledge gays have the same rights as the rest of us. Oh, the horror.

B***S*** Terry, growup!!! You can read can't you? I have never ever remotely made a comment like you are now accusing me of. I choose not to do or be involved in anything that condones their lifestyle. As I have said I will work with them, I will treat them with the same amount of respect they treat me, I will help them if I can, but I WILL NOT EVER BE INVOLVED IN ANY ACTIVITY THAT CONDONES THEIR LIFESYTLE.

Renting to a gay person condones their lifestyle no more than selling them a soda does.

Cato wrote:

ziggy wrote:

So your "agreement" to something or other has no meaning? One party to an agreement (or contract) cannot arbitrarily "cancel" that agreement, not legally.

Boy are you people ever grasping for straws. I have written my share of agreements in my life. I put two items in an agreement. The first is a performace clause. In that clause it states my expectations and conditions for a continuing agreement. I place a time frame to correct deficiecies and a result if deficiencies are corrected. Secondly, I require either a 30 or 60 day termination clause without reason, where either party can notify the other in writing of their intent to terminate the agreement. I do not do long term agreements, without an out.

Then as a practical matter it's not a long term agreement. It is, at most, a 30 or 60 day agreement.

TerryRC wrote:B***S*** Terry, growup!!! You can read can't you? I have never ever remotely made a comment like you are now accusing me of. I choose not to do or be involved in anything that condones their lifestyle. As I have said I will work with them, I will treat them with the same amount of respect they treat me, I will help them if I can, but I WILL NOT EVER BE INVOLVED IN ANY ACTIVITY THAT CONDONES THEIR LIFESYTLE.

Renting to a gay person condones their lifestyle no more than selling them a soda does.

In your opinion, not mine.

ziggy wrote:

Cato wrote:

ziggy wrote:

So your "agreement" to something or other has no meaning? One party to an agreement (or contract) cannot arbitrarily "cancel" that agreement, not legally.

Boy are you people ever grasping for straws. I have written my share of agreements in my life. I put two items in an agreement. The first is a performace clause. In that clause it states my expectations and conditions for a continuing agreement. I place a time frame to correct deficiecies and a result if deficiencies are corrected. Secondly, I require either a 30 or 60 day termination clause without reason, where either party can notify the other in writing of their intent to terminate the agreement. I do not do long term agreements, without an out.

Then as a practical matter it's not a long term agreement. It is, at most, a 30 or 60 day agreement.

That's right!!!

In your opinion, not mine.

Nice, witty repartee. How is my opinion unfounded, then?

You will sell them food but not a house?

You won't starve them but you will put them on the street?

If you are exhibiting "christian compassion", I am proud to not be a member of your club.