As has already been mentioned, the code doesn’t apply to private dwellings for many of the reasons enumerated above. It is not unusual that someone would want to share their home with someone who has common values – regardless of what those values are. Just like the college pot-head wouldn’t want to share their home with a 90 year old grandma who wanted to nag about the dangers of marijuana use, a Christian should be able to to indicate that they would prefer to share their home with someone who shares similar values. During my years as a law student, I should be able to indicate I prefer a roomate without children and the noise that accompanies them. I could come up with many examples – but I shouldn’t have to.

This woman should let the government do what they want to do, and then stand in court and calmly read the code. She’s fine! (And as for the woman who turned her in – SAD!)

Would I fall foul of the law for this? If so, which is illegal;
1.Gender, 2.Occupation or 3.Education ?

What if I also specify a hair colour preference? I prefer natural brunettes, it’s OK if they’ve dyed blonde though.

Joe Miller proves why you need to be careful about your analogies. Using East Germany as a case study in why something is feasible, no matter how innocent in the abstract you may intend it, is just not going……

How dense are you?

Lets see, nice person has a house. Has a few extra rooms since the little ones moved out. Spouse passed on. Hmmm…needs a few extra bucks to make ends meet. Figures, hey, I can rent a room to a nice quiet person who I get along with, one kind of like me…one I’m comfortable with.

But, no…..said person can’t do that, since they’re not allowed to. Nope, can’t ask for a nice person to fit their bill (be it a older white lady, older black lady, quiet non-drinking Christian man who doesn’t listen to satan music, rock for the rest of us, even, gasp, a devout Muslim who strictly follows halal practices or could it be a Jew who knows never to use the same pan, spoon, fork, spatula to prepare / touch both meat dishes and those containing cheese).

Because, yes, there is NEVER any reason other than bigotry why someone might find those considerations critical to the question of will they or will they not rent a room in their home to a boarder.

So, an otherwise affordable housing option (renting a room within a house) is not available. Renter, who otherwise would have a relatively cheap place to live (compared to getting an apartment) is now stuck getting an apartment. Increased demand for apartments tends to drive up prices (you ARE familar with supply and demand there Gumby, aren’t you?)

If you were a Malaysian Muslim in the US, and saw all the room for rent notices said “White Christian only”, then what?

And as long as you’re careening willy-nilly down that fallacious slippery slope, you may as well be worried that the government thugs with submachineguns will show up at your door with a terrorist with ebola, bad breath and stinky food preferences that they force you to shelter.

Jack Wilson — really? A ban on discriminatory advertising of housing services made housing more expensive? Really? ….Really? D’ya have some sort of study that says that? I’d be interested in having a look, really.

In the good old days, it was common for people to rent out rooms to borders to get extra income. You would see ads that read ‘ Room for rent : seeking sober Christian gentleman’. Once you could no longer select who lived in your house, a lot of this housing dried up. Does some 60 year old widow want to risk violating federal law OR risk opening her home to people she is not comfortable with?

If the government is allowed to decide who our roommate can or cannot be, I’d be worried that the next step might be that all searches for roommates will have to be sent to the government and they’ll pick a roommate for you.

Bob