Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bbnccv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!bbnccv!sdyer
From: sdyer@bbnccv.UUCP (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: Leeper's amazing misperceptions
Message-ID: <49@bbnccv.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 29-Mar-85 02:24:35 EST
Article-I.D.: bbnccv.49
Posted: Fri Mar 29 02:24:35 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 30-Mar-85 00:15:04 EST
References: <22@bbnccv.UUCP> <350@cmu-cs-k.ARPA>
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 38

> Yes, I certainly would object to an ad such as Steve proposed asking for
> Christians (or members of any other religion) exclusively to share a
> dwelling.  In fact, I would make sure the state attorney general knew about
> the advertisement, since it is illegal to discriminate on religious grounds
> in housing.
> 
> "Liberation" is not all a bed of roses.  You have to live by the same
> standards you make the oppressors live by.  You may not like it in some
> cases, but it is the price that has to be paid to end discrimination.
> Otherwise you just have a new double standard.

Sounds like my response to Evelyn pressed one of Tim's pre-programmed
buttons.  I would save the tirade against religion for another more
appropriate newsgroup.  What *IS* true in the context of this discussion
is that a personal characteristic such as sexual orientation is as
legitimate a discriminant when making a housing choice as vegetarianism,
gender, smoking, keeping kosher, liking loud music, or even (gasp) religion,
if one cared enough about it.

There is nothing illegal about an individual making private decisions
about whom they wish to live with or associate with.  Some of those
might be repugnant to some (discrimination based on race or religion),
others morally neutral.  I am thankful, however, that we don't have
the government that Tim thinks we have, where individual "right
thinking" and "right behavior" are legislated.  To belabor the
obvious, I am not addressing discrimination by public and private
*institutions*, nor the moral illegitimacy of such discrimination.

More than anything else, I am appalled at the more general controversy
(raised entirely by straights here) who would claim that explicitly
seeking a gay roommate is not only a non-issue but actually morally
wrong!  They of course would not think twice about using any of the
issues mentioned above as criteria in choosing friends, roommates
and lovers.
-- 
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbnccv.ARPA