We are a senior housing placement company in Southwest Florida and have recently become Platinum certified by SageCare to be inclusive to LGBT older adults and their families. More organizations need to go through this training and start updating their policies to be more accepting.
9
Reading this just breaks my heart into a million pieces. The fact that this couple were denied admission just because they were slightly different than the rest is horrible. They were discriminated against just because in the Bible, "it's supposed to be a man and a woman" getting married. This is a free country and people should be able to come and go as they please or do whatever makes them feel happy. Especially, because they aren't harming anyone while doing what makes them happy. What also just makes this even more sad is the fact that everyone should be accepted no matter their race, gender, or religion. It's not right and even today there is still discrimination and it needs to be changed.
5
As I read this article, I thought again how lucky my wife and I are to live at Cathedral Village in the Andorra neighborhood of Philadelphia. Originally founded by the Episcopal Diocese of Philadelphia, and now affiliated with Presbyterian Senior Living, Cathedral Village certainly has religious roots, but has been warmly welcoming to its GLBT residents. We have a monthly dinner, to discuss items of concern to our community, and just to socialize. Marketing has actively tried to recruit in the GLBT community. It's time to remember that religions can be progressive as well obscurantist. Cathedral Village accepts residents of all religions, races, and gender identities. And by the way, non-profit means non-profit. Our community does not make money for any church organization, and all our fees go to the maintenance of the community.
10
With the goal of breaking ground in spring 2019, Mary's House will be the first residence of its kind in Washington, D.C., and one of several in the United States that will target affordable housing for LGBTQ/SGL older adults. Mary’s House will assist in the elimination of overt and subtle discriminatory behaviors, specifically in housing toward people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. As they age, their needs for a more shared communal living environment will be met by Mary’s House and similar living environments. More information about Mary’s House for Older Adults can be found at www.maryshousedc.org
3
Presumably retirement communities are money-making enterprises, even the "faith-based" ones; and yet if they're registered as "faith-based," they do not pay taxes.
Time to limit the tax-free status of money-making businesses run by religious organizations.
Of course, the Democrats exacerbated things when they ruled that Paul Newman's salad dressing business, because an ample portion of the proceeds went to charity, should be given tax-free status.
Every bird-brained 10-person religious sect and whatever it does can operate tax free in America. It's a mistake.
If a religion hasn't been around for a good 300 years or more, it's suspect. At that point, human beings began to be somewhat rational. You know, the Age of Enlightenment and all that.
5
“Thoughtfully and prayerfully reviewing...” There’s the thoughts and prayers again. These religious discriminators really get my goat.
12
What a textbook example of a story examining all sides! I enjoyed pondering the considerations of the people interviewed who define marriage in a traditional, religious way, and also of those who see it differently. Oh, wait, no, I'm mistaken. No attempt beyond the facility itself (which didn't comment) to have someone try to explain why a private, religious organization would take such a position, or on what legal basis they would stake such a claim. Could this storied newspaper at least try to get more than one perspective in a story? You can do better than this.
@JB Yes, I'd like to know how they define "religious values" to include discriminating against two elderly women. WWJD?
9
Any organization administering the health and well being of citizens should never be allowed to proselytize or to use religion to discriminate or deny services. This goes with hospitals as well as retirement communities. Keep church at church and let's have care facilities that are standard across the US and run by professionals, not religious zealots.
12
This story is huge and raises perhaps an even larger concern: is it ever okay for religious people to cite their ‘faith’ as a basis for discrimination? Honestly it certainly seems that this has been the core dilemma facing our country today. What happens at the intersection of religious liberty and individual human rights? How do you stop individuals from practicing their religious liberty to discriminate?
7
I live at Foulkeways, a beautiful retirement community near Philadelphia. PA where we actively welcome LGBT individuals and couples. We would love to have Mary and Beverly consider joining us.
8
Visit an Erickson Living retirement community where all are welcome!
5
The old folks home where I live, Rose Villa in Portland, welcomes residents of diverse sexual orientations. The Oregonian recently reported the stories of some of them who faced discrimination similar to that you reported at "Friendship Village."
4
I am curious whether “Friendship” Village accepts people who are not evangelical Christians? For those defending their policy, would it be ok with you if they refused to accept Jews, Catholics, Mormons, 7th Day Adventists, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc.? What about African Americans?
The Old Testament is just that - Old - and obsolete. Christ brought a new covenant, a New Testament. Unfortunately, most evangelical Christians prefer to adhere to cherrypicked passages from the Old Testament when it suits their own biases - or those of their leaders.
People are free to practice their religion but they are not free to provide a public accommodation that discriminates based on race, religion or sex. And BTW, the Christian Baker case had nothing to do with a “right” to discriminate.
13
Yup, never miss an opportunity to use the Bible to discriminate against your fellow human beings! Good grief, and after all that they still want to live there because presumably it's the place that best suits their needs.
Folks, we can do better. For shame.
11
The question is as a faith-based non-profit does Friendship Village Sunset Hills enjoy a tax break from the federal government. If so they should not be able to discriminate based on sexual orientation. If they give up the tax break then they should be able to set their own policy.
12
Hope these two wonderful people get lots and lots of $$$$$$$$...!
We’ve come a long way, darlin’, don’t stop now!
11
What is scary is hidden in the story is the person whose suit was dismissed because she failed to prove intent. This is a disturbing trend in the law. It seems common sense to me that if your action results in harm, whether intended or not, you should be responsible for that harm. The lawyers can't have it every way. They are quick to jump on claims like should have known. Well, if you action causes harm, you should have known it would do so.
7
They can have their 'prayers and thoughts'. I want no part of it.
9
So, who’s idea is it to send the USA back to The Dark Ages? What a bunch of backwards thinking halfwits.
10
Must mean this retirement center accepts polygamous men, even if they have one wife and a concubine or two. Abraham could have a wife and a concubine afterall. Must also mean that they accept male-female groupings only when the male is clearly in command. It's all biblical afterall.
Or if they want to use Pauline ideas then they would accept that gender does not matter. In Christ there is no male or female, etc.
Reality is that the owners and managers of this complex are ignorant bigots hiding behind the gown of religion. They make Christ puke.
8
Religious groups are doing important work that other groups in our society don't want to do (at least, not in large enough numbers). Religious groups run hospitals, they provide for orphans, and—as this article highlights—they take care of the elderly. But clearly, when these religious groups want to provide these services in ways that are guided by their beliefs, they're the bad guys. Really? These are people putting their faith into action by caring for others. Look, if you don't like how these religious groups are running their hospitals, adoption agencies and nursing homes, great—go start your own hospitals, adoption agencies, and nursing homes! But until you do this, you aren't entitled to say that the people doing this work need to "get off our backs"!
4
Religious groups get hefty tax breaks in return for their public service. That is indeed why we don't tax our churches. (it's not a Constitutional thing, it's just a historical tradition because they are considered charities.) They should serve ALL the public.
10
@Nat Churches run businesses, because the Church is a business. The way I see it, secular nonprofits are acting more like Jesus; without the prejudice and disregard for civil law so evident here.
2
@Nat Religious groups are still bound by the Constitution and "equality for all".
6
After the death of their spouses both my father and my aunt had long term heterosexual relationships with people to whom they were never married. The reasons they chose not to legalize the unions were financial. In both cases marrying would have resulted in decreased incomes. Under the rules of the facility in this article neither couple could not have lived there together. Fortunately, in both cases, they were able to age in place and eventually died at home with loving partners at their sides. I wish the same outcome for all of us, gay or straight.
26
It's easy to make smug comments about polygamy in the Bible. But any reasonable reading of the Bible is going to say that lots of what the Bible relates isn't being shown as how you ought to live—even when it's recounting the behavior of "heroes" like Abraham or David. Reasonable people disagree about how the Bible says you ought to live, but lots of very respectable scholars think that there's a normative view of marriage in the Bible as monogamous, life-long, and between one man and one woman. (See for example Richard Hays's *The Moral Vision of the New Testament.) You might disagree about the normative claim, and you might disagree with the Biblical interpretation, but it's perfectly reasonable (albeit not uncontroversial) to call this the "Biblical" view of marriage.
2
@Nat Aren't we at a point where it is 'normative' to accept a married homosexual couple? You are conflating evangelical political ideology with scholarly biblical works. Your argument at the end of the boils down to - "a book of myth and jewish folklore " ....
6
Whereas your position is based on...? It is not an easy topic, but at some point you are setting your own morals or simply adopting society’s. On what basis do you assume that you are right and the historic position of humanity is wrong....? This is a real question. Is there a point at which you would say that society’s morals have diverged so much from yours that you will no longer accept them? And what basis would you use to decide this?
Keep on fighting the good fight, Mary and Beverly! Know that a lot of people believe in you and your cause.
21
This is a facility operating as a non-profit, therefore it benefits from local, state and federal tax breaks. This should be strong leverage to use to fight for equality. I say *should* be -- but with today's HUD executives and SCOTUS, I won't hold my breath, I am very sad to say.
Please, folks, vote. Vote like your lives depend on it ... because they do. Thank you.
31
I'm afraid this is going to take a long time.
Which Christian faith ? The one founded in Jesus's teaching that we should love others like ourselves ?
14
For those who've actually read the Bible, "marriage as it is understood in the Bible" included a fair amount of polygamy. It wasn't necessarily "one man and one woman."
18
Guess it isn't clear to the facility's administrators which one is the property of the other.
5
@Mike McGuire What Jesus said concerning marriage in the beginning and your adultery or polygamy or just plain sexual immorality are not the same. Go read it, educate yourself.
When going through some tourist brochures from my old town, Rosendale, NY, we found a brochure from the 1930s for a hotel that said “No Jews or Dogs Allowed.” I look forward to the day when we can see how ridiculous this prejudice from our current day is.
24
Whatever happened to "What Would Jesus Do?" on wristbands and stickers and such? I defy any self-described Christian to ask themselves that question and somehow conclude that Jesus would tell them to discriminate.
"As marriage is understood in the Bible" just means "as marriage was understood 2000 years ago," because that is when the Bible was written. Surely it is not necessary for me to go through the litany of social, even legal, beliefs and practices that were acceptable 2,000 years ago but which we have since cast aside? Cherry-picking a few passages from the Bible (particularly as you ignore several of its other passages) and/or attending church with a group of other people who share your specific biases does not turn anti-LGBTQ discrimination into "religious liberty."
14
@Bert
Well, this is interesting. A friend of mine recently moved into a co-op in Indiana. It is run by a religious organization that requires the name of "your pastor" on the application.
So I wouldn't qualify on this basis alone--not that I desire to live in Indiana.
4
Surely, a faith-based facility is pretty short on faith if they don't obey the first and most important rule of civilization: "Hospitality." According to Christian scholars, Sodom and Gomorrah were punished for having failed to welcome, unconditionally, the wanderers in the desert. Failing to be welcoming and non-judgmental to people who need it is tantamount to committing murder, for to deny sustenance to those in need is to offend God in a way that forgoes forgiveness. Those who remain customers at Friendship Village Sunset Hills are now a tremendous risk of having their own souls condemned by the All Mighty, for they are no longer innocent by-standers in the Satanic policies of the facility. Have a nice day.
16
@Max & Max
yours is a really great argument!
4
They refused the couple? That is their right. Tough cookies.
6
@James R Dupak No, it is illegal to discriminate against people based on sexual orientation. Wake up it's the 21st century!!
14
@James R Dupak Then they need to have their tax advantages taken away. Non-profit organizations are not supposed to be allowed to discriminate to a whole host of classes of folks (LGBT folks are usually deemed by many courts across the nation to be included when housing and public accommodation are in question). No tax dollars (in this case, tax breaks) are supposed to go to businesses who refuse to treat these folks equally.
If it goes that far, I would imagine the SCOTUS justices would weigh more heavily the consequences of turning away people from living accommodations than they did so frivolously over treating people fairly in the market place with regards to pastries. At least I would *hope* they'd attempt to reach their inner humanity in this very serious issue.
10
I am sure that 50 years ago, any such community would have refused to accept a bi-racial couple, on much the same grounds. They were wrong then, and these folks are wrong now. These two women are legally married. They are not causing anyone else to "sin." There is no religious right not to know about other people living in ways that *you* find to be sinful. Ya know what the religious folks are scared of? That once they get to know these two "sinners," they'll turn out to like them!
38
I hope these ladies sue Friendship Village for all they've got. As a former renter and now landlord, there is no place in society for discriminatory rental laws based on race, sex, nationality, disability, religion, etc.
As a geriatrician, I have been pleased to see that some retirement communities are welcoming of everyone regardless of sexual orientation. One CCR I worked at 2 decades ago had an LGBTQ support group already in place and it was touching to see many seniors come out and finally get to be who they really were after decades of hiding. At the Orange County retirement community my parents invested in, among the multitude of flyers for events/ activities was a June drag show opened to anyone and sponsored by the community's LGBTQ support group. How difficult is it for people to live and let live?
Bonus: for the CCRs and communities who are open-minded, they open themselves up to a whole bunch of new customers. Not even LGBTQ folks. Coming from a non-white, non-Christian family, I suspect I am not the only person who uses LGBTQ acceptace as a surrogate marker signifying less liklihood of discrimination.
42
@ms
Excellent point! Thank you.
@ms. You’re joking, right? How far do you think these two will get with a lawsuit? They can go all the way to the Supreme Court but by the time they get there Kavanaugh will be waiting with a hatchet in his hand. It’s over. Gay. People. Will. Soon. Have. No. Rights.
Get used to it. It’s only gonna get worse.
1
So let's say a man who has been married 3 times, cheated on all 3 wives, paid hookers and lied about it applies to this facility, I'm guessing that he'd be accepted.
68
Yes, he would. Especially if his current wife is very good-looking and wears designer clothes.
37
@theconstantgardener They would slobber all over him and his MAGA hats.
7
It isn't government that we need to get off our backs.
It's religion.
79
It is terrible that such institutions continue to exist in this day and age. I am neither religious nor conservative, but I cannot imagine anyone, regardless of their views, to not abhor such policies and treatment.
At the same time, I am a professor in a large university. My colleagues do research on discrimination. Guess what the data shows? Discrimination based on race and religion is considerably more rampant than discrimination based on sexual orientation. Indeed, there are large swatches of areas in the country where a black family would be unable to buy a house in a white neighborhood because it would "reduce the value" of the neighboring houses. In many cases, realtors, banks, and "neighborhood watch" groups are becoming the gatekeepers to make sure that the US remains segregated.
So, my sympathies to Ms. Walsh and Ms. Vance, but I do think that there are larger problems that we need to tackle as a country than a religious christian institution denying a lesbian couple.
5
You're engaging in whataboutism. Yes, there are many problems in this country, and many forms of discrimination, but none of that changes what happened to this couple or means the NYT shouldn't report it.
37
@jen I despise comments like yours.
"This is bad, but that's so much worse. So just put up with it." A preposterous and immoral position to take.
5
@jen
For a professor, you're making a big mistake: "data shows" is incorrect because "data" is plural (indicating many points of fact).
Private enterprise still has some rights in the current politically correct America, where the LGBTQ minority seems to have usurped the Constitution. By the way, what is the next letter to be added to the ever growing list of approved sexual identities?
12
@paul. Amen to this. The rush to political correctness has blinded us to helping the weak in society. This specific "agenda" does nothing to help the poor and handicapped.
2
@paul Private enterprise does not have the right to discriminate on the basis that legislatively banned.
Your claim of usurping the Constitution suggests either a great deal of irrational fear or a willingness to resort to false claims to support fear mongering.
12
@paul... Friendship Village Sunset Hills is a not-for-profit organization. That means it pays no federal or state income taxes or local real estate taxes. So is it really Private Enterprise? If they want to discriminate against LGBTQ, then their tax exemptions should be revoked.
24
So here's a question or two to consider. Imagine you are single and have moved into this community. You meet someone who lives there, also single, with whom you fall in love. If you are heterosexual, will you be allowed to visit one another (with everything that "visiting" implies) in your respective apartments? What if you don't want to marry, or want to live separately? Is the place going to toss you out for having a sexual relationship outside marriage?
Likewise, what if you're gay or lesbian or bisexual, and the same situation were to arise? Would you both be tossed out of the community for having a same-sex relationship? What if you live in the community, but your partner doesn't?
Would an unmarried gay or lesbian couple be permitted to cohabitate? Or is the marriage part what the board of the community finds objectionable? Fundamentalists want a monopoly on defining marriage as one particular kind of thing (that was their argument at the Supreme Court, the definition that they wanted to monopolize).
In any case, with all of these scenarios, the institution would be engaging in egregious, unconstitutional invasions of privacy. Perhaps we have to stop asking people if they're married. Whose business is it if I am or am not married, and to whom, regardless of gender or sexual orientation?
The crux of this issue is that so-called "religious" institutions want to control other people's behavior. Authoritarianism is their raison d'être. It's all about the patriarchy.
23
@Natural Historian - some "religious" institutions do want to control others' behavior and I agree that is not right. But it seems that a religious institution can be a closed society and only practice its thing within its own walls. I am personally fine with that - they do their thing, they don't bother me and I do my thing.
I am all for anti-discrimination but I also believe that people need to be given the ability to practice beliefs they hold dear if they do it on their own property, which this facility was doing. Otherwise we are using discrimination as an excuse to enforce conformity to a belief, which I think is not right either. There has to be a balance as these two rights are in conflict.
4
@Scott,
This institution is a non-profit supported, in part, by tax dollars. If an institution is willing to take tax dollars, some of which are from LBGTQ people, then they should admit them. Why should LBGTQ citizens have to support institutions that will not treat them with respect?
21
@Scott Werden How is a retirement home a religious institution? It's a business.
A better lawsuit would be to sue on the basis of what is "understood" by reading the bible. Giver the hundreds of examples of obvious errors, contradictions, and violence/hate sections, the bible can't reasonably be understood by normal rational people. 2000 plus years of published continual argument of it's meaning backs that up.
10
“The term ‘marriage’ as used in this policy means the union of one man and one woman, as marriage is understood in the Bible,” the policy noted.
Not that a biblical analysis has any bearing in a legal discussion about discrimination against the LGBTQ, but following this principle would be tricky indeed for an assisted living facility. As “understood in the Bible,” marriage is about more than chromosomes.
Consider: It’s not as if it’s hard to find what Jesus said about marriage. He said outright, “I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Does the facility investigate their residents’ marriage history and compare it to Biblical marriage standards? Similarly, “as marriage is understood in the Bible,” it is for LIFE. As he told the woman at the well who said she had no husband: “Thou has well said, ‘I have no husband’ for thou has had five husbands, AND THE MAN YOU NOW HAVE IS NOT YOUR HUSBAND.”
One must naturally wonder how many straight couples in this facility would be able to withstand scrutiny under Biblical principles to see if their current marriage would be considered valid. In all likelihood, Biblical standards would consider a great many living arrangements dens of adultery. It is no different from the infamously sanctimonious clerk with multiple marriages who refused to do her job and hand a gay couple their marriage certificate. These people are DROWNING in hypocrisy.
19
@Matt. It's not hypocrisy when the blind man holding the elephant's trunk describes the animal as snake-like but blindness compounded by a lack of curiosity and sheer laziness.
Too often, religious dogma emerges from a Walmart grab-bin of chintz.
6
keep your religion to yourself.
13
When my Aunt Kathy got sick from Cancer she had to move in with Bev the local Physical Therapist who shocked the small upstate NY village when she left her husband for her girlfriend. They were the only ones that would take care of my gay Aunt Kathy. So after all the years the secret was out that the ladies of the Key club that went on their annual weekly girls trip were gay.
So sad because she was the best Aunt, who taught us all how to ski and fish!
18
If this intolerant corporation is registered as a non-profit, it means they are practicing their hateful bias with my tax money.
I'd just as soon they stop.
35
There are many institutions who do not make an issue of same sex marriage.
Why TARGET faith institutions, purposely, who stand up for the principle of marriage between one man and one woman... they have every right to stand up for their principles. Go find an institution that will accept you as a married couple.
That has nothing to do with tolerance; it smells like an unwarranted 'vengeful attitude.
6
@Kenell Touryan
Did you read the article? These women didn’t target anyone. They wanted to live near their friends, in the community they’d lived in all their lives. How hard is that to grasp?
Why are so many Christians so hyper-sensitive about being confronted with their hypocrisy?
42
They are afraid to be confronted, because they know deep down how frail is their faith.
13
If you believe that the Red Hen had the right not to serve members of the Trump Administration then it seems to follow that you should certainly accept Friendship Village following its stated religious policy of who it will or won't serve, which is a much lower bar.
10
What kind of logic is that? Wow!
9
@Nathan Friend Dear Nathan, It does not follow. The Red Hen refused service to an individual based on that individual's personal behavior, not merely being a member of the Trump Administration and not based on a protected status such as same-sex marriage, race, religion, etc.
18
@Nathan Friend
No matter how delicate they are, the members of the Trump administration are not being subjected to discrimination on the basis of their gender. These women are being subjected to discrimination based on their gender.
20
Remember the baker? Same stuff, different day. Things will not change until each state institutes a policy to protect the LGBTQ community! I suggest they research states where this has already been done and move to one of those.
3
@Phyllis Actually is isn't the same. The Supremes said the baker didn't get a fair administrative hearing so they sided with him. But in public accommodations, you probably still can't discriminate for religious reasons.
9
@Occupy Government.
This Supreme Court will be rewriting public accommodations law any second now. You’ll be able to discriminate against anybody you want, especially if it’s on the basis of religion. You don’t seriously think public accommodations law as now written is going to stand, do you? Neil Crimesuch has made his position quite clear. Kavanagh will have a field day. It absolutely astonishes me anybody sentient thinks civil liberties are going to survive Trump. Done, folks. Finished. Game over. 2016 elections? Excuse me. I have to leave the room because the laughter is too painful.
2
The issue here is not really religion, it is whether a private community has the right to decide who it lets into the community, regardless of how they make that decision.
I am a bit surprised that the two ladies even chose the place - the article says they did extensive research so they must have known it was against same sex marriages. Why would someone chose a place that is openly hostile to their situation? I sense there is more to this story than what has been reported.
9
@Scott Werden No, the community does not have the right to decide who it lets into the community.
It can only make those choices in conformity with law.
13
@Scott Werden ... you didn't read the article very thoroughly ... the place did not announce its discriminatory policy in print. It only did so after the women explained they were married. Remember this exchange?
“I said, ‘We’ve been married since 2009.’ She said, ‘I’m going to need to call you back.’”
They mailed a copy of their cohabitation policy to them. Even though it noted that cohabitation was limited to spouses, apparently same-sex spouses don't count.
It's a violation of the federal Fair Housing Act and the Missouri Human Rights Act.
Case closed. It's the law.
18
So much for friendship by the faith based people running the show.
7
Two people who have been in love with each other, have cared for and supported each other for most of their lives don't meet a christan standard?
I admit a bias as this could be my sisters situation.
I can see why she stays in Massachusetts. In an area she calls her gay ghetto,
Life is too short. I hope they find a home that will respect, cherish, and celebrate the devotion the have shown each other.
10
Wait a sec - there are plenty of polygamists in the Bible. Does this facility encourage polygamists to move in? What about the eating of pork and shellfish? Do they forbid residents to consume such items? Do they allow slave owners to live there? 'Cause there were plenty of those in the Bible, too. If they're gonna get all biblical on us, they should go all the way! Why pick and choose which 2000-year-old lifestyles to promote? In for penny, in for a pound!
22
@Allison
Don’t forget the sin of wearing cotton/ polyester blends.
6
"Guided by our faith..." Does it ever occur to ppl that maybe their faith is a lousy guide?
17
What if you don't believe in or ascribe to "the bible"?
How does a secular retirement home get to ram "the bible" down your throat.
10
As soon as I see "faith based" anything, I get suspicious.
19
The leaders of the "Faith" can't possibly allow their followers to so closely interact with "the gays", lest the followers find out "the gays" are human beings, just like them.
10
Ugh. They tried to join on purpose, just to get attention. Too bad we got rid of the laws making this stuff a crime.
Obama should be held accountable for these things.
3
@MPA
So you think discrimination should be legal?
5
@MPA
Obama? I do recall it was Chief Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Court of the United States who found same-sex marriage to be constitutional.
I know, I know, your life isn't worth living if you can't blame Obama for something every single day.
7
@MPA: together quietly content for 4 decades.
and now, all of a sudden, they want attention?
6
People profess to be religious seem to ignore the word tolerance in the Bible and they are the biggest hypocrites- I hope the ladies win their case but I I wouldn’t want to live in such a hateful place.
23
As I understood in the Bible?
So, the husband owns the wife, and Ken beat her, rape her, sell her, or even murder her?
Because that’s exactly the way it was understood in the Bible!
13
You know, a couple of centuries ago, when some Puritans in Britain were mad because the rest of the country wasn't interested in worshipping as they did, they decided to leave the country and go elsewhere.
If the board of Friendship (hah!) Village feels so strongly that others aren't adhering as they would like to their particular religious principles, perhaps they ought to consider leaving this country and finding somewhere else to live, where narrow-mindedness is accepted and welcomed. We here in the USA prefer not to have religious zealots trying to dictate to us.
14
They should have read the rules to start with! Sounds like two money grubbers.
5
@Whancock: did you read the article?
they did read the rules and proceeded
with their application bc the rules did not
explicitly exclude "same-sex spouses".
7
All I need to do is see the term 'faith-based', to know that whomever is employing that term is using it to try and hold themselves up as 'better than'...is using that term to try and rationalize hate and discrimination, etc.
No matter what your religion, all 'holy books' and the content within, can be twisted at whim. That doesn't make it right, nor does it make it infallible. Formalized religion is for the weak of mind, and has caused more pain and suffering the world over, since the beginning of time. Those who point to all the 'good' that religion has done, seem to forget that that good was done by individual people...not by the religion itself. People who do good...who want to do good... can and will do so, with or without 'religion'.
6
I see this as a more difficult issue than many of the commenters suggest. Should people with particular religious beliefs be allowed to live together in a community that prohibits those with different religious beliefs? My first thought was – yes - they should have the freedom to do that. And then I thought what if other racial groups were excluded based on religious grounds? That wouldn’t be OK. So while It seems like there ought to be room to carve out the liberty for people to live in ways that do not violate their religious beliefs, within reason, I can’t actually think of how to make that work. In any case, I sincerely believe that this should not be a venue to demonize either the Retirement Home, or the couple, as I believe that both are fundamentally well intentioned (from what I read).
@Rob
If the retirement home receives any government Monies, either from Medicare or Medicaid, they should not be allowed to force their religious beliefs. Oh and it’s not like a gay couple who goes in there would force other members of the community to suddenly “become gay” and start having sexxwith same sex members. They just want to live.
14
I live in a CCRC, and neither the management nor the residents distinguish between same or hetero marriages (or just living together). As the mother of a woman in a gay marriage, I enjoy living in such a milieu.
Pity the residents of "Friendship(?)", for they know not what they do.
18
Besides being “true” to Biblical values, there is another unspoken reason Friendship village discriminates against same-sex married couples. It has to do with money. Since the umbrella organization is a nonprofit, it raises money through charitable contributions to supplement its operations. It is likely many of its contributors are against same-sex marriage. Therefore, there is a decided fear that by admitting same-sex married couples, it would offend contributors and negatively affect the bottom line. In situations like this, always FOLLOW THE MONEY.
16
Just reading about the sexual abuse by priests scandal in Pennsylvania and now this discrimination in a faith-based facility. I was raised in a devout Catholic home, but cannot bring myself to join a parish as an adult. I admit that I sometimes miss the sense ocommunty we experienced back then (1960’s) but I can’t handle the hypocrisy.
If we as a society were only more tolerant of “others” and if we simply followed the Golden Rule and treated people as we ourselves want to be treated, wouldn’t we all be in a better place?
I would love to have those women as neighbors, and agree they should sue for discrimination and take their business elsewhere. As for the abuse victims, I hope they find some peace in knowing they were not alone and their awful secret is finally out.
In the meantime when I need a dose of religion and ceremony I go to the Episcopal Cathedral. The prayers, hymns and rites all feel so familiar, but the warm, welcoming atmosphere and sense of inclusion always leaves me feeling happy and fulfilled, unlike when I would leave a Catholic Mass or service. Just the entrance procession on Christmas Eve conveys inclusion, with clergy consisting of women and men (one with a ponytail!) young, old, short, tall, Asian, Black—a true cross-section representing our neighborhood, our city, and our country. And, as my Mom and Aunt used to say, they are much better singers!
6
It never ceases to amaze me that business owners think it is alright to discriminate against whomever they want too, based on their Religious beliefs. Since when does Religion represent a business owner's business interest?
I wonder if the "Friendly" retirement community can get away with asking the question about a couple's private sex lives. Then use the excuse of religious beliefs to void the contractual agreement they signed with the couple.
If I were the couple I would also sue in civil court for the Retirement home not living up to their contractual agreement. Triple damages maybe.
They accepted the couple's contract to purchase a unit, the deposit and a 90 day closing date. Also, the Friendship community offered as an inducement to get the couple to buy a unit, by waiving the entrance fee. This contract is not a one way street. All parties to it signed it. Damages are in order here.
It is very dangerous for Courts to make a decision saying it is alright to discriminate against whomever you want because of Religious beliefs. There is supposed to be Separation of Church and State. Our judges and lawmakers are conveniently forgetting that part of the founding fathers declaration of Separation of Church and State. Not to mention that "all men are created equal" Oh I forgot that they are women, that must be the real problem.
Our freedoms are being taken away at a very past pace.
And it had better stop real soon, before another civil war is started in earnest.
18
Freedom of religion means that one is free to practice whatever religion one wants - or doesn't want.
It does not extend to forcing that choice on another human being. That's why, as great a book as the bible is, it is not a legal document. The managers of this retirement community should becaware of this and act accordingly. Right now, that means apologizing to this wonderful and thoroughly well meaning couple.
27
If we accept Darwinism, why would the nature create species who don't WANT to reproduce?
2
By the same token, homosexuality is present in species across the spectrum of life, so why do some have such a hard time accepting its human incarnation?
@areaderAre You implying that every one and thing should, or should want to, reproduce?
@areader It doesn't matter why.It did.
2
It's mind boggling that people who profess to be religious so totally lack compassion and kindness. Would Jesus turn these people away? I think not. Christianity is no longer the religion of Christ, just as ISIS is not the region of Mohamed. Both groups contain narrow minded individuals who have lost their way.
40
Pathetic, Jesus Christ would be ashamed !
20
I just called Friendship Village (314-842-6840) and told them I was interested in bringing my parents there. However, I am a bit concerned: my father sometimes works on the Sabbath and Exodus 35 2 clearly states he should be put to death. Also my mom sometimes wears cloths made from two different threads. If they are "Biblical" I was wondering if they would take care of stoning my parents to death. The receptionist told me "oh wow I don't know about that."
68
I just called as well. I hope they’re flooded with calls. I am appalled by their actions which also set dangerous precedents.
8
@MD
By "marriage between one man and one woman as it's understood in the Bible," I assume they mean they will not accept divorced and remarried people with a living former spouse? As it is written in Matthew 19, "They asked (Jesus), “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” They said to him, “Why then did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her?” He said to them, “It was because you were so hard-hearted that Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery.” I also assume that no divorced person with a living former spouse is working for them, given their strict Biblical interpretation. I would hate to think of them that this action is just bigotry and hypocrisy, posing as religious faith.
10
Clever, But a completely different matter, since I am certain the bylaws of this institution have no requirements about the threads of clothing or working on the Sabbath.
1
I think this strategy of casting anti-gay discrimination as sex-based bias is doomed to a big slap-down by SCOTUS. I wish the NCLR would take a different tack. Of course, in MO, that means not taking the case as there are no protections for gay people there.
2
Are there divorcees living there? Are there unmarried couples living together (as many elderly do for tax reasons)? Is there anyone living there who has broken one of the 10 commandments? Etc.etc. I am tired of the selective use of the Bible to support bigotry. Once you let the Bible control our laws we might as well have Shariah.
57
Jesus Christ would never want to be associated with the Board of Directors of Friendship Village. Imagine having given your life to preach a message of love and then see people with twisted ideas distort it into an ugly justification for discrimination, in your name!
What would Jesus do? A modern Jesus would sue them and demand rectification.
45
@Marc There is no modern Jesus. There is only the one and only true Jesus of 2000 years ago.
1
I hope Mary Walsh and Beverly Nance win their lawsuit. And I hope that there is a big amount of money that the so-called "faith-based" retirement facility will need to pay. Then Walsh and Nance should thumb their noses at the place, take the money and go to a difference facility that will welcome them with open arms. Religion should not hide outright discrimination.
47
@Jeff And after they big in court, the retirement facility will go bankrupt and shut its doors.
1
Well, religion is the root of all evil. It proves it again and again and again. It should be outlawed.
21
@AMM:
"Evil" is an abstract concept that was invented by the religious leaders. In the case of Christianity, it is also personified as the immortal, very powerful, Devil and of course means there are actually multiple Christian Gods.
Pious VP Pence of course, manages to keep that sort of logical consequence under his hat.
1
I'm striving to be "Christian" and think it was horrible to turn this couple away. At the same time, aren't there any facilities catering to gay couples? It would seem some entrepreneur should be ahead of the curve and be marketing facilities welcoming LGBTQ citizens (and everybody else wanting to live in them).
Also, I thought money talked in the US--funny they should turn down people who were ready to pay up front .
2
There are a few, but they’re scarce and very expensive. And why would you think we gay folk would want to live in a ghetto of only gay people? There are a few nice straight people out there, and we dint mind living among them as long as they don’t throw their heterosexual privilege in our faces 365/24/7!
6
I applaud their lawsuit but why would they want to live in a place that has such a vile view of their relationship. If they received a pamphlet from the community where they blatantly proclaimed their bias, other people living there have to be accepting of those "rules".
I could never feel comfortable in a community where people saw bias and accepted it blindly.
3
@Lily Quinones
Did you read the article?
3
Maybe it's time for the US to refresh their Constitution to entrench LGBTQ rights as clearly is in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It's unfathomable how this situation requires legal intervention. Wake up southern cousins! Love is Love. How many heteronormative couples stay together as long as this couple? I'm not gay, but I support equality... and dignity to all humans .
41
One more reason I don’t want to live long enough to end up in a retirement home. Growing old gracefully and being granted dignity by others is only for rich, white, married straight people, preferably Christian. I volunteer as a visitor to people in retirement homes and assisted living facilities. One older straight Holocaust survivor is treated with disdain because she is unmarried and single, with people assuming she’s a lesbian, much to her chagrin. One woman I know is a quadriplegic who hides her bisexuality as she hears her aides decry the “perverts”. Shame on these bible-thumping right-to-lifers who disrespect people who have endured so
many obstacles to even survive long enough to retire.
What a cruel society we live in. And as a shout out to my younger LGBTQ activists, it doesn’t necessarily “ get better.”
43
I disagree with those readers who question whether this married couple would be happy residing at Friendship House. Mary and Beverly chose this retirement community because of the warm reception of current residents, those people with whom they would be in daily contact. The problem lies in the zealous management.
The difference between this incident and that of the Christian baker, is that Friendship Village receives federal benefits in the form of non-profit tax status. Therefore they are required to not discriminate in this case, to uphold the marriage laws of the country. I am grateful that Ms. Walsh and Ms. Nance have committed to fight this egregious discrimination.
85
Why would a gay couple want to chance living in a faith-based community anyway? I guess if you find it your calling to spend your twilight years (and thousands of dollars on lawyers) fighting discrimination when you could be as happy elsewhere — maybe among nonjudgmental nonbelievers, then it’s worth it.
4
@AlNewman To AlNewman,
You seem to be assuming that this couple and gay couples in general are nonbelievers. Many issues about gay discrimination is in religious settings where the gay person wouldn't be if they were not a believer, e.g., gay teachers in religious schools who get fired when someone outs them. This couple clearly finds a religious sponsored facility more appealing (note they also investigated a Lutheran sponsored home.)
Other readers need to be reminded that many Christians and Christian groups are welcoming to LGBT people. The writer who suggested this problem will correct itself as a generational thing is on to something.
3
So as a single gay man of 72 with two older sisters, no children and no expectation of help from my nieces and nephews (not that I would want it), so far in fair health, this is what I have to look forward to? I guess I better hope I predecease my sisters. Or make certain I predecease my sisters. MAGA? Oh, yes, by all means, let's go back to a time when gay people had to hide in their closets rather than face discrimination from the rigidly "religious" and other bigots. Feh!
54
There are plenty of accepting communities—move on and give your $ to those. The market will correct this generationally.
4
@JoJoCity - Separate but equal is the idea.
2
I detect some anti-Christian bias in this article and the related comments.
I believe the desire to associate or live with those of similar values is common in other religions besides Christianity. For example, the mission statement of the Morselife Foundation, a prominent senior-living provider in Florida (picked at random) reads as follows:
TO SOLICIT, RECEIVE AND INVEST THE PROCEEDS OF GRANTS, CONTRIBUTIONS, PLEDGES, AND OTHER SUPPORT FROM GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES AND THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, AND TO SUPPORT ALL AFFILIATED AGENCIES WHOSE SOLE MEMBER IS MORSELIFE HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENHANCING SENIOR LIVING IN THE SPIRIT OF JEWISH TRADITION.
Similar references to Jewish values and traditions are to be found in the mission statements and advertising of most Jewish senior facilities. Does this mean that Jews may associate and live together freely and without criticism or scrutiny while maintaining their values and traditions in their later years but Hindus or Moslems or Christians cannot?
Surely the NYT is not promoting a double standard?
7
@Mon Ray - what if the applicants were jewish and gay? Isn't that the point here? Right religion/wrong sexual orientation? Really??
2
Mon Ray,
Before you jump to conclusions have you checked if these facilities in fact discriminate based on religion or sexual orientation?
I used to volunteer at Jewish Home and Hospital in NYC. They had residents of every persuasion.
5
@Mon Ray - Do you have a reading deficiency? Where in your all caps statement are non-Jews forbidden to live In Morselife facilities?
4
A sad and selfish commentary on bigotry in America's Christian "religious" communities. While I am sure there are Christians who do not share this narrow minded fear mongering exclusionary mind set, those who are in powerful decision making positions continue to behave in ways that are out of date, against federal law, mean spirited and should not be supported or allowed to continue. Stand up for love and respect
32
I believe in Santa Claus. I believe in the Easter Bunny. I believe in the Tooth Fairy. I believe in Monsters under the bed. I believe in Jesus.
Enough already. It's time for the LGBT community to take the polite gloves off and make these people and organizations accountable for their bigotry. Take them to court and force them to offer scientific proof of their sincerely held beliefs. Friendship Village, the oxymoron of the day.
Hopefully Beverly and Mary find a more welcoming place to retire.
Sorry for the rant, but I didn't expect to wake up this morning and read something that pushed all my outrage buttons.
51
@Ron Brown I guess you do not believe in miracles--they happen--but there is no scientific proof as to why. EX. Traffic accident--Person in Coma--brain waves non-existent--heart beating--2 days later person wakes up--no brain damage--scientific community baffled.
Would a retirement community be considered discriminatory if it was themed on Bluegrass or Jazz music, fishing or origami , catering to any group of people with a particular common interest?
3
@Lane
If it denied origami enthusiasts on the basis of race or sexual orientation, yes.
20
I think the "powers that be" at Friendship Village are not very conversant with the Bible. If they were, they would be very aware that multiple wives and concubines were common in the early days. Would they accept a current day Muslim with two wives? How about polygamous members of the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints?
Actually , the non faith based retirement community in Maine that my husband and I recently moved out of turned down a heterosexual couple who were not married several months ago. This in a day and age where many older couples who have been widowed or divorced don't get married and just cohabit because marriage can mess up their finances and make their heirs nervous. Thirty or more years ago people sometimes looked askance at such arrangements but most people now see this as a "fact of life." And just pick up any "design" magazine or sections of this newspaper and how many articles profile two gay men and their business, gorgeous house or condo, and even their children. But for some only serial adultery is fine and same-sex anything is a no-no.
41
@Julie Carter If you believe-- Both serial adultery and same sex anything are against God's Laws !
1
So, everytime there is conflict between the religious and secular, secular wins by default? This is not liberal tolerance,but socialist anti Christian dogma.
9
@Lane
"Liberal tolerance". How curious that I keep hearing that phrase.
I'm not sure that I understand what you mean by it.
Perhaps you help me out by giving me some examples of "Conservative tolerance"?
If there are none that you can think of then perhaps you can give me some examples of "Conservative intolerance"?
I'm reminded of the words from "The Princess Bride" : "I do not think that means what you think it means."
Examples - ?
7
Read the Constitution, please.
9
@Lane - Yeah, why do we prevent true believers in the ancient Aztec religion from taking virgins to the top of pyramids, cutting their hearts out, and holding them, still beating, up to God?
No wonder the weather is getting worse,
7
How is this discrimination based on sex? Women are allowed in the facility. Women who have marriages that violate the religious beliefs of many are not. Therefore, there is no discrimination based on sex
5
@Fred
Discrimination based on denial of service. Marriage between any 'type' of non-blood-related consenting adults is legal at the Federal level.
8
@Fred - A rule which requires that married couples be of different sexes is not based on sex?
5
@Fred
same sex marriage is legal.
1
So-called "religious liberty" legislation and rulings establish a privileged class of Americans - religious people - who get to disobey laws they don't like, via a conversation-ending "because God (or my priest) (or my rabbi) (or my imam) says so." This recourse is completely unavailable to atheists, or for that matter to any Americans who don't adhere to one of the recognized religions. It therefore privileges religion over non-religion, and recognized religions over a supernatural belief that someone came up with earlier that day. Lots of people might have lots of reasons for discriminating against LGBT Americans. Why should someone be allowed to discriminate because his reason for doing so is that he believes Christianity, Judaism or Islam requires it, when a different someone isn't allowed to discriminate because his reason for doing so is that he just doesn't like gay people, or he's been bitter ever since his wife left him for another woman, or he's simply a jerk? All these (garbage) reasons for discriminating may be just as deeply held as theists' beliefs in the inviolability of whatever medieval or Iron Age practices their parents taught them.
68
So true. Too bad atheists can’t say, “Well, my God, facts and reality says....”@bergfan
2
@bergfan
The right wing ‘Christian evangelical’ malarkey about ‘religious freedom’ is straight from topsy turvy. It’s Sharia Law for holy rollers, vigilante style, the very opposite of freedom.
So if I say ‘my beliefs are guided by tiny magical green men from Mars, and they tell me I don’t have to rent my apartments to you,’ that’s just fine under our Constitution? Of course it isn’t. If I run a movie theater and say I won’t seat pork eaters because my bible says that’s verboten, that’s just fine as well?
Hog freaking wash. Let’s wake up and smell the coffee, shall we? It’s the 21st century, not 700 A.D. If you want to live by delusion and superstition, do it at home, or in a ‘house of worship’ with other like-minded (or mindless) adherents to your delusion. Keep your delusional thinking out of our government, schools and the marketplace, and don’t foist your delusion on others.
There. My Sunday sermon.
3
@bergfan So if the reverse were true: You are an atheist and a Christian wants you to make a cake into the shape of a cross--You who do not believe in any deity have the right to say--"Sorry I can not make a cake into a religious object as it goes against my beliefs!" That's what is wonderful about America--Freedom to practice as you wish.
1
I think about this issue more and more as I get older. I'm about 15 years away from retirement (God willing) and I wonder what my partner and I will do as we get older. I can see why this couple still wants to move to Friendship Village despite being told they aren't welcome. The article indicates they've lived in the area their whole lives and they know other retirees already living in the community. They want to be with the people they know in the area they've always lived in. Some of the comments suggest setting up "gay only" retirement communities; no thanks! I imagine I'd want something much more diverse, like what I have now.
84
Well, if your ‘faith’ includes bigotry then I guess Friendship Village is on firm legal ground. /s
15
Let kindness and care of others determine acceptable decency.
16
"This country is on the verge of becoming a fascist theocracy." - Frank Zappa (said during the Reagan Administration).
19
@susan, again a sweeping statement which is a total non-sequitur.
1
As ignorance and bigotry take hold of this country, the most intelligent choice left to people viewed as undesirable is to emigrate. Please don't do what the Jews did in Germany, staying until it was too late - the wave of intolerance and ignorance is becoming more unstoppable by the day. Sell your possessions and leave, your country isn't what you fancy it is.
8
@Richard Moncton ...
What would be better is if people like you would stand up and resist the kind of discrimination that has "taken hold" of this country, and do something about it, instead of blaming victims. How dare you cast aspersions on the millions of Jewish German citizens who did whatever they felt they could do, or should do, and were caught up in Hitler's genocide.
Pray tell, where to emigrate? And how? It's not that easy to up sticks and start a new life in another country, presumably with no job, and no reason to be there other than as a tourist with a 90-day visit limit.
Why don't people like you, presumably good persons who care about their fellow travelers, use your privilege to do something to make the country less ignorant and bigoted? Why should I or anyone else born in this country have to up and leave because millions of decent citizens will not oppose what can only be viewed as evil?
2
@Richard Monckton Can't leave, as I am retired and would without Medicare. Indeed, the way Deplorables are, they may cut off our social security if we left.
Overreact much - there’s an old fable about the boy who cried wolf - you should read it.
Integration of the LGBT community is fairly new, with marriage just becoming legal in 2009. Viewpoints can take generations to change - this country is so much less bigoted than when I was growing up in the 80’s, both with LGBTQ and with race. Homosexuality was illegal not that long ago.
Every time there’s a story about discrimination, perspective should be implied. Otherwise when there really is a constitutional crisis - nobody will listen.
And that time may be coming soon with the current administration.
2
At the very least, "Friendship" Village needs to change its name to something more accurately descriptive of its policies. I suggest "Judgemental" Village, or "Self-Righteous" Village as possible alternatives.
94
The dirty secret is that there are a lot of white upper middle class gay people who like restricted communities until the restrictions are applied to them. That's why they didn't have a problem with the policy until it restricted them from living there.
7
Oh, good! Let’s play what about....
Helen, I don’t know whether that is true in this particular instance but the kind of hypocrisy you call out is real and needs to be called out. Even so, that doesn’t make what happened to these women any less wrong.
1
@Hellen You said it! What s good for the goose is also good for the gander!
1
Through the religion called Christianity you are supposed to treat people like you want to be treated. So if these facilities are so religious that they follow that rule and discriminate...why is it so easy for them to stray from the basis of their Christian belief I stated above. I understand that some people don't think it is right for same sex marriage. But the world is changing so much now and days that if you don't change how you think about same sex marriage you will run into problems. Not only will you run into problems in life in general but the work place especially. In conclusion I think that this is wrong to discriminate against these people just because they like the same sex. Also I believe that no matter your religion and how strict you follow it you may need to change due to society changing constantly.
@Lindsey: Preferences do change, Principles don't
1
Christian Taliban. They have no place in normal, progressive society. Take away their tax exempt status.
27
@vandalfan: obviously you do not either know who Christians are and who the Taliban are!
1
Since my god is a bigot and my god will burn me in hell if I treat you like a human being, I have ti be a bigot, as well. The power of the bigotry of magic sky fiends is staggering.
12
So if this couple had been allowed to move in as the exception they would never have challenged the policy? That's what's really wrong with this story.
3
Where in this article does it say what you just insinuated? Nowhere, that's where. Don't you have anything better to do on a Sunday afternoon than shower us all with your snide vitriol?
Hellen, you really are "in hell."
3
@Hellen I agree. If no one had done due diligence on the couple's application, they would have moved in and most likely said nothing about the existing policy. They did not self-identify as a same-sex couple when they were applying, and that says a lot. Same sex marriage is relatively new, it does not have a good relationship with Christianity, and it is a safe bet that (some of) the other residents and professional staff are not comfortable with same sex marriage.
Occsionally arises the aspiration that one might live so long as to emerge or grow into a reality beyond these petty pseudo-religious discriminations; then loom such evils as Friendship Village management and USAG Jeff Sessions to remind us of the anatomically-impossible fact that there really are and perhaps for long still will be more rectums than humans infesting this otherwise pristine planet.
3
Yet another example as to why all religious entities need to have their tax exemption status revoked.
Public money should not be subsidizing bigotry and hate.
31
" Dear Lord Dear Lord take a look at your children before it's too late
And tell them nobody wins if the price is hate".
Take a Look -Aretha Franklin (1967)
28
These attacks will be furthered along by having a Supreme Court Justice that is "stacked" in favor of discrimination against the LGBT Community. This is NOT what the majority of this Nation believes in!
Some of the biggest offenses against Humanity comes from the religious teachings of Evangelical Christians! I agree with so many of these comments. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the LGBT Community. Period.
11
So find a place that doesn't have that rule. It's likely to not be the only retirement community in the area. Knowing that it is faith based should have alerted you to the possibility that they would take a dim view of lesbian marriage.
I am truly done with people using anti-discrimination law to force their beliefs on others.
21
@Rich Well, for my part, I am truly done with people using their religion to force their beliefs on others.
21
@Richand vise versa!
1
@Rich - That last statement is mind blowing. It's like:
I am truly done with people using property rights law to force their beliefs on bank robbers.
3
If the rule limits cohabitation between people who aren't family to those that are married and this CCRC adds an unwritten rule that only Biblical marriages are recognized as valid could Catholic facilities limit it to Catholic church weddings, Mormon facilities to only Temple marriages, Muslims to only Imam conducted weddings, etc? How is that not illegal religious discrimination especially if all beliefs other than LGTBQ are acceptable?
Who decides the policy? It strikes me as similar to Hobby Lobby in which an owner's beliefs trump those of the vastly greater number of contrary beliefs squelched by the policy.
9
Perfectly understandable that this couple would sue the facility, but I'm having a hard time understanding why the 'Friendship Village' didn't identify its bias earlier when they were vetting the place.
Secondly, why would they still want to move into a management that clearly could discriminate against them in covert (and less covert ways once a supporting spouse is gone or the couple is less capable physically or mentally of fighting back) ways?
A bit more journalism effort could have added some density to the story.
6
I support everyone's right to believe, worship and pray as they might. When you try to impose your beliefs on me or anyone else you've overstepped your bounds. By a long shot.
I seriously can't wait for the rapture. The country and the world would be so much better off all these true believers floated away up to the heavens. I think we should start "The Rapture Project." Let's build a bunch of hot air balloons and send them up into the sky and over the rainbow, just like the great and powerful Oz.
10
Another article illustrating the narrow-mindedness of "people of faith". Unfortunately, the lions did not get enough christians back in the day. We will not have real freedom until religion is outlawed and the perpetrators banished. I recall a quote from George Carlin, "Tell people that there is an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you . . . Tell them the paint is wet and they have to touch it to be sure."
13
There is so much wrong in the Bible I wonder how it has survived.
8
Is Sharia Law the goal of America’s Christian Taliban or just an incidental by-product ?
8
I’m starting my own “ religion “. The number one teaching : Jesus was GAY. The twelve disciples were his entourage, a very early version of hairdressers, make-up artists, wardrobe stylists and publicists. Chew on THAT, hypocrites. Seriously.
15
@Phyliss Dalmatian I have a fridge magnet that says "Jesus is a black lesbian" If only that were true, I might reconsider my atheism! As to the article, my time to find retirement digs is on the horizon. The first words out of my mouth will be "I am queer and married to a woman. If you have a problem with that or if you have staff will might hurt us, tell me now. And here in Minnesota, we have a serious problem with elder abuse in care facilities. So I might just walk into the deep snowy woods when it is 10 below and call it a day.
2
Want to help? Donate to NCLR—The National Center for Lesbian Rights—for their lawsuit. They were among the several legal teams who secured marriage equality at the Supreme Court.
http://www.nclrights.org/press-room/press-release/lesbian-couple-sues-se...
How did America become such a hateful country? If you do your homework, you’ll find most of it coming directly from religious organizations, or from those misguided millions who have never read the Bible in historical context, and thus have no idea what it really means, but mindlessly believe what their manipulative clergy tell them to think.
I defy anyone to find our hatred and bigotry rooted in any foundation not underpinned or directly supported by a religious institution. This goes for discrimination against people of color to LGBTQ people to women. Show me one that isn’t driven by the church or some twisted organization like Family Research Council or Focus in the Family, it even the Catholic church.
Religion (“re-ligio,” or “bound together by law”) has been a tool of ruthless repression and abuse of power for millennia. Christians, for all their noise about love and compassion, are the worst and most vicious of the lot.
8
I actually thought marriage in the Bible was like between many wives and concubines and of the children of conquered villages and so forth. I still don’t get where they came up with this marriages in the Bible is only between one man and one woman nonsense.
28
Faith-based does not mean denying people of the right to have faith or practice their faith. In fact, inviting this couple to join would contribute to and deepen the quality of faith for current residents, particularly those that have never shared a meal or attended religious services with a gay couple, or had their children go to school with the son or daughter of a gay couple. Having this couple join their community would help address the fear of the unknown, which is a driver of many forms of discrimination. And, with respect to the Bible, do they honesty believe that Jesus would have delivered this message?
29
@Q "Faith-based" can mean anything. It was up to the couple to ask Friendship Village what the term meant and how it applied to a same sex couple. If they had done that bit of due diligence upfront, they would not have been blindsided by the exclusionary cohabitation policy after they signed the agreement and made a down payment.
When will society finally get tired of allowing millennia of
belief in abstract, debatable, mutable philosophy (religions
and their various deities)dictate our interpersonal and
international relationships?
17
@Michael Sherman
Centuries ago if I had walked around saying praise Zeus I would be viewed as righteous. If I did it today I would be considered insane. Hopefully someday the same will happen to other myths.
9
We have 3 levels of rights in this country.
Level 2 protects heterosexuals when it come to jobs, education, housing and accommodations.
Level 3 protects homosexuals and lesbians when it comes to marriage and nothing else. So no job protection or housing protection. Then we have those with super rights at level 1, at the top, white Christians who can do anything if they claim it’s part of their religion or is based on their religious beliefs.
We are not a country that treats people equally and that is what Cuomo was pointing out. And relying on Biblical definitions to discriminate should be per se Unconstitutional..
36
Readers please note that the NY Times states that this is a “faith-based” retirement community.
If you do not agree with their faith, don't go there. There are plenty of other options.
11
@Gerhard Faith is for anyone who has it. The community's website makes no mention of any current or past denominational affiliation and is quite vague about what "Christian" beliefs guide it. Conservative Evangelical Protestants have tried to co-opt the term "Christian", but frankly Christianity has always meant a lot of things that have crossed spectra of politics and values. The notion that you can "go elsewhere" neglects the very large role of denominational retirement communities and the often limited (typcially corporate, in the worst way) alternatives.
22
@Gerhard If this faith-based community is legally a religious organization itself, then you're right.
If it is not, then it is a public accommodation, and it is breaking the federal law that illegalized discrimination on the basis of gender or religion.
Please also note that Federal funding ie Medicare reimbursements should be withheld in cases of discrimination.
If you want the money, don’t pull this stunt.
2
Friendship Village thinks it's okay to be sued and sullied? Hmm.
5
Excellent quote!
Friendship Village — a “faith-based” but nondenominational nonprofit....
If indeed they are “non-denominational” then by what right do they impose their “beliefs” on others? Furthermore, since they are non-profit that suggests that there is taxpayer money involved in the operation of this institution, once again, by what right do they impose their “beliefs” on others?
52
@D. Knight
I agree with you. I think the IRS should revoke their tax-exempt status
3
“The term ‘marriage’ as used in this policy means the union of one man and one woman, as marriage is understood in the Bible,” it stated.
Like Jacob and Rachel and Leah, right? I'm wondering how many people actually READ the Bible.
49
I’ve read the Bible and attended church and Bible studies classes. It’s at best a work of science fiction and at worst, one of the most violent and least compassionate works of literature ever complied. To take the contents of that book literally is ridiculous. I was lucky enough not to have been indoctrinated when I was a child and was able to apply reason and evidence to what was being taught in church.
10
@Susan Foley The fundamentalists have long since learned to "interpret" any biblical passages which might cause them problems.
Like the one about giving half the money in your purse to a beggar.
7
I trust you'd do. Living in NYC it is best to travel with light (or empty) pockets. Some of these deplorable poor just help themselves. I suppose that is their entitlement. being in the lower 99 percent and all.
This is the world Justice Kennedy envisioned in his Masterpiece Cake swan song.
24
The odd thing about so called Christian claims of religious liberty is that it is not in the bible to shun LGBTQ people. The bible is pretty clear about homosexuality; at several places it declares that behavior to be a sin. But there is nothing about shunning people with that behavior.
On the contrary, the great commandment orders us all to love God, love our neighbors, and love ourselves. The bible declares there is no Jew, no Gentile, no free, no slave, and no man, no woman. In other words, we are all one in Christ. The bible has story after story of commands to accept the stranger.
Some will say that the bible declares homosexuality an abomination; that is true. But in addition, the bible declares several things to be an abomination: cheating business practices, lying, deceit, etc. I doubt if many so called Christians shun folks with those behaviors in the name of religious liberty.
I am a Christian and I am humiliated by this behavior of shunning LGBTQ folks by so called Christians. They are cherry picking bible scripture to rationalize make their discriminating behavior. That is not what the bible says.
Shame on them.
37
@Greg
Thank you for your reminder that Christianity today often bears little resemblance to the teachings of Jesus. Thank you for representing what is good about Christianity as I remember it from my upbringing many decades ago.
One quibble: the Bible, especially the New Testament, is not at all clear in condemning homosexuality. English translations might be, but the original Greek in which the earliest versions of Jesus's teachings were preserved is less so—the nature and language of sexual virtue and vice isn't directed at prohibitions against certain sex acts and is more general. The Bible is much more concerned with fidelity within marriage, so this retirement community would be much more Christian if they barred married couples who had violated their vows.
16
The Bible does not mention the word “homosexual,” since that word and its ancient equivalent did not exist.
The passages in Leviticus that are always trotted out by bible-waving fanatics are about rape—gang rape, specifically—not about sexual relationships. The sin was one of violence and power, not about consensual behavior between adults in a relationship.
Most people have no clue what the Bible says, or doesn’t say, about homosexuality. But most don’t know that the story of Noah comes from the Epic of Gilgamesh and that the Bible is a hodgepodge of stories and myths written or transmitted by a variety of people over many millennia, many of them having nothing to do with Christianity at all. The number of people who believe in Jesus or Christ who have never read even a basic history of the ancient world that produced Judaism, Christianity, and later, Islam, is appalling.
5
@Greg
A wonderful and illuminating explanation. Thanks, from an atheist.
1
This isn’t disgusting let people love who they love, and who the hate want to be with just because you use the term “freedom of religion” it doesn’t make it any better if you aren’t accepting then don’t say anything just because someone identifies as LGBT doesn’t give someone a right to reject that person everyone should be treated equally
4
Big proportions of would-be LGBTQ seniors died of HIV, so the battle to normalize senior care is probably a decade behind.
4
@Bri
Just to be clear, estimates of 1%~4% of the population belong to the LGBTQ community worldwide. That would be 3~12 million Americans.
“As of 2016, about 675,000 people have died of HIV/AIDS in the U.S. since the beginning of the HIV epidemic.”
So perhaps 25% of the LGBTQ community passed on due to AIDS. Still very sad, that is certain.
It's not any religion that leads the culture...............religion either morphs or implodes due to an evolving culture.
Those of us on the outside of religion that are driven by what is in the best interest of everyone, create culture. It usually takes religion decades to catch up to us.
For good change, we all have to choose Love.
Love your neighbor as yourself.
Peace!
8
@Julie
"...It usually takes religion decades to catch up to us. "
Unfortunately, its usually centuries, if ever.
But your comment is beautiful and strong.
1
Kudos to Ms. Walsh and Nance for filing a discrimination lawsuit against Friendship village. I wish them the best but ever since the "gay wedding cake" debacle and the current right wing political climate leading our country I do have much faith in them receiving justice. I
I think they need to consider themselves lucky that they dodged a bullet. If they had moved there they would have been subjected to the bigotry of the community and likely would be very unhappy living in such as place. Better that they move on to a community who is more tolerant and welcoming. I hope they end up with a nice cash settlement to move on.
5
Did you read the article? The residents were fine with them. The hypocrites in the board are the ones on the crusade.
5
As religion in America begins to take on the kind of powers that the Catholic Church had in the middle ages, we are clearly seeing why such religious authority must be curbed.
I would no more want to Sharia Law infused into US law, whether Federal, State or Local, the I would want religious views on human rights prevail over the Universal Decoration of Human Rights or the Bill of Rights.
Anyone should and must be protected for the right to exercise their religious preference. However, under no circumstances should religion be allowed to dictate public policy and discriminate or castigate anyone it deems unworthy.
Is the the 21st Century or the 10th Century?
28
Both Kansas and Missouri proudly allow discrimination based on sexual orientation. To them, it is a feature, not a bug, and just another example of the intolerance many states advance.
22
After Hobby Lobby and Masterpiece Cake, how could anyone think that the Republican Supreme Court would not permit this discrimination. As long as you use the magic words "faith based" any discrimination is permissible.
30
@Sausca After the Trump presidency has turned into ashes we will have to deal with all the right-wing operatives who have been placed on the bench.
Best solution would be to impeach and remove every federal judge appointed by Trump but the two-thirds of the Senate required to do that will be difficult to achieve.
So, it will be time for some court packing. Expand the number of judges at all levels so that there's a majority of honest citizens.
The best way to think of the Federalist Society is as a right-wing conspiracy dedicated to infiltrating our Federal Judiciary. As if a Democratic President had nominated judges suggested by the Communist Party. Yes, I mean exactly what I say.
3
Let's be clear. This retirement community's decision to discriminate against this lawfully, legally married couple based on their "religious"beliefs is a way for the so-called evangelical community to invalidate marriage equality and regulate LGBTQIA+ couples to second class citizens. The Master Cake decision is essentially the LGBTQIA+ version of the Dred Scott decision: in other words, the LGBTQIA+ community has no right to access the same public accommodations as the rest of the citizenry that the so-called religious right is bound to respect. We are returning to the days of the hellish, blasphemous lie of Plessy v Ferguson-separate but equal"-that denied an entire segment of the population the full rights of their citizenship-and SCOTUS is pulling this nation backwards into the abyss of bigotry. Elections have painful, real consequences that we must live with every day-and may live with for at least the next generation. Let the name Merrick Garland be your rallying cry on November 6.
24
So far, article after article which discusses racism or sexism or just plain old bigotry in general lead to the same thing: good old fundamental Christians who do not practice Christian teachings. Instead, they exclude, marginalize and push hatred and intolerance. Shameful, but for almost 1800 years, governments and religious groups have used their version of Christianity for grabs at power, to authorize exclusion, and to order death even.
22
Who sits on the Board? Why so much reticence in naming names?
15
"Santa Rosa, Calif., is home to an upscale retirement community specifically for gay and lesbian seniors."
Where are CA's indomitable foes of discrimination demanding that this facility cease discriminating?
Or, is this like the leftist definition of "racism": such a concept doesn't apply to "minorities"?
Perhaps, the facility simply announces itself as an LGBT
facility (one wonders: is there a test?) and depends upon people to self segregate, thereby passing legal muster.
4
You’re 100% wrong on this one, and why so little empathy? This is a community that openly welcomes LGBTQ people, one of a very few, created to respond to the discriminatory treatment LGBTQ people receive in many other retirement communities. I’m sure if you wanted to live there, you’d we welcomed. Do you?
3
Did you ever stop to think that maybe the reason the facility in Santa Rosa isn't being sued is that the LGBT facility doesn't discriminate and allows heterosexual retirees to live there?
6
@Brenda Do a test, Brenda. Walk into a gay bar, announce that you're a straight woman and you just want a drink. See what happens. And no hogging the karaoke machine.
7
Trump, as another article in the Times today, wants to increase religious freedom which means that religions can be more intolerant to of those of us who think their views are inane.
11
".... “guided by our Christian faith,”...". Well, those few words tells me all I needed to know about this "christian" (lower case intentional) community. Perhaps the ladies put too much of their faith (no pun intended) in believing this community was a real Christian community, you know, welcomes all as their savior purportedly did.
The ladies may be able to prevail in the courts, but, the animosity and "deep state" discriminatory acts will still be present.
Move on ladies. Find a community that is welcoming of all.
8
To quote Woody Allen (to the best of my recollection) from “Hannah and Her Sisters”: If Jesus came back and saw the things people do in his name, he’d never stop throwing up.
21
@Susan Gerber Indeed, these soi-dise "christians" would probably call the REAL Jesus and His Disciples a bunch of commie degenerates living with a prostitute.
16
@Susan Gerber
Woody Allen would know.
Where can we donate money to take this "Friendship" Village to court till the end of days?
12
Donate to The National Center for Lesbian Rights, one of the best legal advocacy organizations in the country for LGBTQ people. They’re representing the two women suing the company.
www.nclrights.org
12
@Natural Historian Done!
“After all this, they still want to move into Friendship Village.”
Ladies, sue them for everything they’ve got. And then live elsewhere. Don’t give them one dime.
18
@Satire & Sarcasm: In one way, "Don't give them a dime" makes sense. On the other hand, integrating the community would be a good thing— and the women have friends there and felt welcomed by everyone except the board.
1
According to what version of the bible is hatred and cruelty a wise?
14
Compassionate Conservatism. Bigotry in action.
19
But I imagine Friendship Village would take in Donald Trump. Having 5 children with 3 different women, sleeping with adult film actresses when he has a new born, admitting that he would date Ivanka if she weren’t his daughter and also proudly boasted to grabbing women by their pussies would make him an ideal Christian neighbor, whereas two women who have been in a loving relationship for 40 year she would not be acceptable neighbors. I don’t which is worse the blatant discrimination or the hypocrisy. If they wanted to build a Friendship Village in NYC I hope they would be denied the permit to do so.
37
It's called "Friendship Village" Ha Ha! Just another example of Religious Hypocrisy! At judgment day they will all meet their Maker and have to explain their behavior. SO SADDD!
12
Friendship Village might want to take another look at how "marriage is understood in the Bible."
Polygamy much?
19
@AJ
And no divorcing, either - right?
17
Please take the time to respectfully share your opinions of the shameful, hypocritical actions of Sunset Hills Friendship Village by emailing them:
[email protected]
The actions of Friendship Village are most likely guided by a small bunch of narrow minded and blissfully ignorant homophobes who control the board. Let them know the silent majority is watching them and judging them.
9
@lowereastside
Done, thank you!!
The bible condemns divorce do they turn away divorced people?
10
The reporter (like many others) has it wrong about the baker and the cake. He did not refuse to bake a cake because the customers were gay. It was the type of cake. A Jewish deli will sell kosher food to Christians and Muslims but you can't force the deli to sell pork. Can you force a printer to make programs for a Trump rally? Or wedding photographer to take pictures of a dog show?
Surprised the the place did not take the women. Retirement homes need a constant influx of customers to stay in business.
Better editing. Some people might not know what C.C.R.C.s are.
3
@Reader In Wash, DC
So you are saying a gay wedding cake is made from different ingredients that a hetero marriage cake? Such nonsense.
12
@Nb
The baker was willing to sell the gay couple any cake in his shop. He was just not willing to decorate a cake with a gay wedding theme.
@Ian
What is a gay wedding theme? My first reaction was to laugh. Only it's not funny.
"After all this, they still want to move into Friendship Village."
My physical appearance is a dead give away to my minority race. When it comes to discrimination life's to short to constantly address every instance. I get discriminated by my own kind because I can't speak the my native language so how can not expect it from others.
Find someplace else that accepts you for who you are.
3
@mlb4ever
People have tried that route for centuries. Guess what - its exhausting! In the end, its self-defeatist and cowardly.
2
I am very much against discrimination. Many comments here express not only disgust with Republican ideas but also a conviction that associating with Republicans is beyond the pale. I consider these bigoted and discriminatory and I believe such comments should not be printed.
4
I see. So the NYT should censor comments because you don’t agree with them? And they call US snowflakes.
6
Well, if they're off topic you could flag them.
2
Religion is a socially acceptable form of mental illness. Justifying discrimination based on one's interpretation a fantasy novel should not be acceptable in 2018.
12
Take away their Medicare and Medicaid funding for discrimination and let's see how long they don't accept "non conforming couples".
13
as marriage is described in the Bible I have read (the original, not the sequel), marriage is quite often between one man and several women.
not only is this case an illegal and outrageous insult to this particular couple and all same gender couples, it doesn't even make a good argument for a lousy policy.
14
The statement went on to say, “We are taking the matter very seriously. We are prayerfully and thoughtfully reviewing this issue.”
Aha ! Another case of "Thoughts and Prayers". How very Christian.
14
With "friendship" villages like this, who needs enemies? I suspect their policy has less to do with faith and much more to do with their perception that older people with the money to pay for their services are more likely to be conservative "Christians."
1
With Attorney General Jeff Sessions announcing the creation of a “religious liberty task force,” ... "religious liberty task force"??
The First Amendment restricts government restriction from preferring one religion over another.
The First Amendment right to practice your religion is not absolute. For example, you cannot practice a religion that has human sacrifice or slavery as one of its tenets.
Your practice of YOUR religion cannot impinge on MY practice of my religion, because my rights are just as strong as yours.
You do not get the right to apply YOUR religious tests to MY life. If you insist on that "right," then I am going to insist on MY right to apply my religious tests to YOUR life.
I hope these ladies sue the pants off "Friendship Village."
I find the name of the facility to be quite ironic.
12
"Faith based" has become "hate based." We need a strong system to publicly identify discriminatory organizations like this so that they can be boycotted, shunned, and most importantly, appropriately taxed.
6
I hope these ladies collect a rat settlement and use it to move into a Quaker-run CCRC.
3
Are there such things?
Like a black man wanting to be the leader of the kkk.( It is obviously unnatural).
As is these women living immorally under GODs laws and wanting to live in a Christian community. They are the very definition of hypocrite. No matter how politically correct the world wants to be, their way of living is not morally correct. So for them to live among people trying to live morally in this upside-down world, it is not fair to the people in that community.
I would like to say that this argument of one persons wrights overshadowing wrights of many, It is starting to reveil
its destroying nature and will not go on forever. Thank GOD for that!
We all deserve Equal Wrights sir
17
Who says it’s not morally correct? The most immoral people are those that derive their morality from a book of myths. I’m glad you have a direct line to god to tell you what is moral or not. Pathetic.
4
@ron dion
You sound very wright-whing, sir.
Actually, I have an even bigger problem than you do.
I'm sick of religious organizations taking money that they have no intention of paying taxes on. This particular organization is a "non-profit". It has absolutely no problem using streets that we, the tax-payers created, nor the sewers, electrical lines, taking Social Security or Veterans benefits and using such money to pull that "HOLIER THAN THOU!" routine.
If they want to be "religiously recognized" then they must refuse ALL that has been built by SECULAR MEANS. Either you are separate from the State - or you are NOT. Either there is a First Amendment - or there is NOT.
And either we are living in a theocracy - or we are living in the United States of America.
GOD does NOT rule this country, sir.
Our communities are NOT "Christian".
It's people like you, sir, who are making atheists out of the whole rest of this country.
Frankly, we're tired of this nonsense.
You want to live in a "Christian theocracy"?
Move to the Vatican State.
Just don't take your wife because women are not allowed to legally live there with a man.
DUH!
8
Looks like this Friendship Village location should change its name to Bigotry Burg.
16
A letter:
Dear Tony,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law.
I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. As you said, "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man and a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? She is 6 years old, healthy, and very smart. She doesn't want to be a slave, so that might be a problem.
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19 24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
(cont.)
17
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?
7. Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear contact lenses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though Lev. 19 expressly forbids this: How should they die?
9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? What should we do with the NFL?
10
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these
things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
11
Ah, "Christians." You gotta love 'em. Not.
4
religious beliefs supporting bigotry, again
5
OK, this is the third or fourth time this story has run. Is there a shortage of news?? Is there a shortage of reporters?? Editors?? And, the same thing has occurred with other, unrelated stories. The motto of TNYT used to be “All the News That’s Fit to Print”, not “All the News That’s Fit to Print, and reprint, and reprint”.
2
The supreme court wedding cake decision, Sessions' "religious liberty task force," and the federal government's slide into the deregulation of everything that can be deregulated, the ignoring of every regulation and apparent need for regulation that can be ignored, along with governmental demonstrations of cruelty, such as imprisoning babies, are all part of a dog whistle to haters to bash potential victims and get away with it. As Trump famously said, "Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise. They won't be so much, because the courts agree with us too..." The Electoral College was about the flagrant taking of privilege by certain slave owning white men and this is the legal system the EC gave us by electing Trump and annulling over 3 million of our votes against the Republican project of dismantling civil rights and human rights inch by inch and day by day any way this can be done, using "faith" here, the courts there, and rule by fiat whenever that is allowed to stand.
1
Polygamy is in the bible. FLDS retirees welcome then!
2
Christians chose to ignore their supposedly foundator of their religion. No surprise, this foundator was Saul/Paul, a most conservative Jew romanized.
It is difficult enough living in any type of senior housing, never mind having people hating you for who you are. Then bringing religion into this segment of the population is like throwing kerosene into a fire already smoldering.
3
When did the Bible become a book about how to hate? Whatever happened to do unto others as you would have others do unto you?
8
Friendship Village Sunset Hills.
I don't even like the sound of that.
"Yeah, I hope I die before I get old..."
Pete Townshend, 1965
4
Busybodies for Jesus. I’m so tired of these smug, hypocritical fools. What do I want MOST for our Country ??? Freedom FROM religion. Any religion. Apparently, that’s just too much to hope, or pray for. Pun intended.
9
Hmm, looks like an investment opportunity?
Retirement villas for homosexuals? Surprised this need has not been filled.
2
This is a story of intolerance by religious bureaucrats. Recent revelations from PA tell stories of child rape, enabled by different religious bureaucrats.
In each case, they use their god as a cudgel, and their religion as a shield.
The most insidious disguise of the devil is as a god-worshiper.
8
"Faith-Based" homophobia and prejudice. All too lauded and promoted these days, from the White House on down.
6
What do they think they are? Cake bakers? /sarcasm
3
Another faith based Jesus loving community that practices hate and exclusion. If there is a nursing home component and they are receiving Medicare/ Medicaid funding they should be stripped of all tax payer funds. Why should my tax dollars support a bigoted hateful religious community??
12
Friendship Village indeed!
2
If memory serves me, verses of the Bible were used with great efficacy to justify slavery. Apparently, “Friendship Village” learned that biblical lesson well.
Let’s all hold hands, form a prayer chain, and pray that they lose in court. In the meantime, boycott these bigots.
5
But of course, Evangelicals had no problem voting for a thrice married serial philanderer who wants to date his own daughter.
While all religions are bad, Evangelicalism has to be the worse. Nothing but a religion of bigotry, intolerance and greed.
10
taking a step back, isn't also possibke to see its proselytizing as a Ponzi scheme?
4
It 's to bad that the LGBT community is not capable of taking care of itself when needed. Why are you so dependent on other parts of society? Why can't you bake and run yout own bakery's ? Why can't you shelter you're old,Some of you need to buck up and start doing the right thing and stop being needy. It would be nice to have a Gay run bakery and get anything you want on the top, or send your loved ones to retire in a friendly, safe, clean, professionally run retirement community. Why would anyone want to live in a place they are not welcomed, No Thanks!
1
And segregated schools were great until that darned Brown vs. case ruined everything.
10
Why should they we have to do that? What a ridiculous proposition and nothing more than a ploy for a separate but equal policy. Pathetic.
4
Surprising that the ironically named Friendship Village--I would have called it Hitler Village--is still on anyone's list of places to make a final move.
3
I have zero sympathy and I have debated this with gay and straight people I know for many years. The same people who complain are the same people who support these religious organizations or in my view, cults. They always think they are the exception to the policies. It's no different than that Jewish doctor who was online praising white supremacists. He thought they would tolerate "good" Jews. It's like a black person thinking their blackness will be overlooked if he/she is a good klan member.
Stop enabling your oppressors and thinking they will ever like or accept you. Their policy and beliefs are clear. What isn't clear is why this couple would want to give such an organization their money. One way the klan was broken was by hitting them financially. Time to do the same to these religious cults. Stop joining their gangs, stop giving them your money and end their tax exemptions. Either that or stop complaining.
4
Do they base their medical policies on the Bible as well? Their cleaning schedule? Landscaping?
Or does the Biblical emphasis apply only to gays and lesbians?
2
Really backward! Religious dogma is very dangerous.
1
"Marriage... means the union between one man and one woman, as marriage it is understood in the Bible."?????
These are obviously some bigots who never ever read the Bible. In the Bible, marriage can be between one man and several women. And of course the man also can have sex with the female slaves, who have no say in the matter.
Among Christians and Jews, the meaning of marriage has changed over the millennia. Most importantly, the legal meaning of marriage has changed in the United States since the days when wives had no right to vote, own property, or enter into contracts.
Regardless of whether the people running this facility are bigots, they have an obligation to not act illegally.
10
@Marvant Duhon
Perhaps these bigots would be happier doing business in a country that allows for marriage to be closer to how it was in the Bible, such as Saudi Arabia. It's not an exact match - the Saudis only allow four wives at a time, whereas David had a hundred and Soloman 500. And Saudi Arabia does not allow the marriage habits of Noah's children, nor the family arrangement of Lot's daughters. But most Biblical Polygamists had (if you don't count female slaves) no more than four wives at a time.
2
So, according to the powers that be at Friendship Village marriage is "the union of one man and one woman, as understood in the Bible." Really? I guess they missed the passages about King Solomon's 700 wives and 300 concubines.
5
This is all so petty on the part of the association. I wonder what the consensus would be if a vote of the residents was taken. These "christian" ideas are so outdated and only touted by the ignorant. Law suite or just find another place to live that is welcoming. One day these fools will realize that we are all human beings.
3
The Bible-thumpers strike again. Your need to continue to believe in science fiction, and claim, without evidence or reason, that some mythical God-creator is commanding you to deny your fellow human beings their civil rights and treat them without compassion, is simply disgusting. Your religious freedom ends when you deny others their dignity in “his” name.
9
Jesus doesn’t know the bigots who run “Friendship (sic)” Village and they certainly don’t know Him.
Ditto for the alt right majority that will soon be running SCOTUS’ legitimacy into the ground.
Trumpo’s election had consequences and the good “Christians” on the Court will make sure the LGBT community is one of the first to know.
3
Joseph and Mary almost certainly did not have an official marriage license that they could have produced for Friendship Village after they raised Jesus and wanted to spend their golden years in a Christian-loving community. WRONG! According to the good Christians at Friendship Village, poor Joe and Mary are persona non-grata. Motel 6 for you guys!
6
Please stop pretending to love Jesus while treating his children cruelly. The whole world (including other Christians like me) is beginning to recognize the lie which is North American Evangelical Christianity.
10
Love only grows through sharing. You can only have more for yourself by giving it away to others.
Brian Tracy
2
Has anyone considered the fact that Jesus Christ might have been Gay?
Most men in that age married early, mid twenties at the latest ,so they could start their families in those uncertain times, dying young being one of them.
5
They should know better than to look anywhere that admits to being "faith based," which means, ruled by ignorance and bigotry.
1
Oh the pain and suffering those with delusional"beliefs" impose on others.
1
The discrimination that these 2 ladies encountered has been justified by claiming religion but this group and the baker before use religion to mask their prejudices. The Bible does not exclude marriage between same sex couples though there are some vague references to homosexuality. The Bible does allow a man to have many wives, a practice more common during those times but illegal now. Stop using the Bible to justify your biases. Learn to accept all people as Jesus did or stop calling yourself a Christian.
4
What century are we in ?
7
The argument that serving gays violates ones religous rights is rediculous. Religion IS NOT public; its a private affair, and serving gays in no way hinders one's ability to practice their religion in church and home. Business IS public, and ANYONE operating a public business has a choice: serve all, or none, and if they cant do so, then get out of the business. Thankfully for them, a third choice also exists: move to religous states like Saudi Arabia, Israel or Turkey where religious discrimination is not only welcome, but its legislated. Problem solved.
8
It seems Friendship Village is in immediate need of a name change.
8
Who in their right mind would write such a policy?
A spouse is a spouse, even in the eyes of God !
5
We live in a time where the activist conservative Supreme Court has redefined Freedom of Religion into Freedom to Exclude, and even Freedom to Hate
6
I'm looking for an Atheist retirement community. Though I expect it to be tolerant of residents sporting superstitious beliefs.
6
It is not discrimination, it the policy. Live elsewhere if you do not share Christian values.
Christian values? Do you assume these two ladies aren’t themselves Christians? It’s a policy, a policy of discrimination, that’s certain. And if they accept Medicare or Medicaid, they’re in violation of federal law.
The only values I see on display from this organization (and from you) are hatred and bigotry. The board should be fired, today. Hypocrites.
9
@No-- In what teaching of Christ do you find an affirmation of the hatred of others?
9
A cohabitation policy based on the Bible? When Abraham and Sarai did not have children, Abraham and the servant had a son.
After Lot's wife turned to stone, he had sex with his daughters so they could bear children.
King David had Bathsheba's husband killed in battle so they could marry. And that was after sang, "Your love to me was more wonderful than the love of women. How have the mighty fallen."
Now... what part of the Bible's fascinating cohabitation policy do they adhere to?
7
Which Bible?
The one approved by a Man (King James)?
The one who’s boos were “sanctioned” by Catholic Popes?
The Gutenberg version?
The people who wrongly claim that their version of the Bible is the literal word of God ignore the truth of centuries of changes done to the Book by Men to suit their political needs.
6
The Bible also forbids divorce.
Yet I'll bet that more than half of these residents have done it.
This is why I am atheist: Because the "religious" demand the "right to be intolerant".
Since that is what "religion" has gotten down to, then it is time for all religions to take a long break and have the government investigate them for failing to follow the Constitution in spirit and in deed. If they are failing in that duty, then they need to have their "non-profits" and tax-exemption jerked. They can come back when they promise to be nice.
This is a revolting little tale.
Shame on them. Yes, sue!
8
Friendship Village, eh?
I suggest that they update the name in order to accurately reflect their mission and mandate.
How about "Conditional Friendship Village, where we welcome everyone whom we judge to meet our sometimes literal and sometimes conveniently interpreted version of scripture"? Can I get an hallelujah?
Can any of those who refuse a service to non-heterosexual people or couples actually articulate how other people's personal relationships negatively affect their own? If all they have is a bible to hold up, then they are just spouting dead dogma, and that is not helpful.
Best of luck to Ms. Nance and Ms. Walsh.
4
It’s time the law clearly and concisely defines freedom of and from religion. A business open to the public should never be allowed to deny customers services or products or employees benefits based on “religious belief.” Religion is a personal practice. If yo us don’t want to be arrived to a person of the same sex, good news! You don’t have to. But you don’t have the right to deny me or anyone else the right to marry the person of their choosing.
2
If a religious retirement facility is going to violate a couple’s right to privacy (ie, what they do in the bedroom), then they must also inquire of all other couples; have you ever committed adultery, worked on a holy day, indulged in blasphemy, coveted the property of another?
The discrimination seems to be rather, using selected religious requirements. And do they stone residents who...fall by the wayside?
And of course, as a nonprofit, what tax breaks do they get, .....and on and on.
Inquiring into ALL the religious practices of those who use only one to discriminate- a direction neither side should look forward to, but may be required in future. Better shut down the facility offices on Sunday- or else!
3
To many people marriage is between a man or a woman; call it whatever you want but to many people it is not a marriage with same sex people. Everyone is entitled to their opinion whether religious or otherwise. A private facility (religious or otherwise) should be able to set their standards the same as who you want to rent a two-family house. People are quick to sue to get their way, financial win, etc. And for this very reason people will be more careful in the future as to what they say and advertise; and I would say "rightfully so."
@Jan Many people believe whites are superior to other races. Other people believe that women should always be subservient to men. People hold all kinds of beliefs about various religious groups, and most of those beliefs are not positive or accurate. And you're right people are entitled to their opinions no matter how hateful or how much we disagree with them.
In this country however they are not allowed to deny what is offered to the public at large based on those beliefs.
6
@Jan
Yes, Jan. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it's ignorant, bigoted, and rooted in superstition.
But that doesn't mean they ought to be able to conduct business that way.
5
@Jan
In the United Stares, civil marriage is not defined as narrowly as that, or didn’t you get the memo?
This place is not a church. It’s a business. And it can’t discriminate in public accommodation.
They should be sued. The board should be tossed out, fired by the residents who are themselves being treated as if they were children, denied a community that values diversity by a self-righteous pack of bigoted theocrats.
7
As a senior citizen, companionship and friendship is even more important then when I was a young man. When morning comes and I open my eyes and see the overhead fan still spinning, I'm thankful for another day. Old age is frightening in many ways, never knowing when a fall will end your life, being less capable and less agile than any time before. It's despicable that Friendship Village would deny me a good friend and companion because of gender. Utterly insensitive, un-Christian and despicable. I can think of no other way to describe their policy. When we need friendship most in life, "Friendship" would deny it based on THEIR morals. In my opinion, they are IMMORAL to harass folks in their twilight years.
8
Even though I'm against this kind of discrimination, I think Friendship Village has the right to do this with the caveat that they only have the right to do it if they receive no support or special favor from the public in any way.
That would include any exemption from any kind of taxes and they would not be allowed to receive money from any organization (religious or otherwise) that receives a tax benefit or exemption.
Then we would quickly learn if they would cling to their "religious" basis for this discrimination.
6
"The term ‘marriage’ as used in this policy means the union of one man and one woman, as marriage is understood in the Bible,” the policy noted."
What they really mean is that marriage is the union of one man and one woman *at a time*, with serial unions not problematic.
As marriage is understood in the Bible, meaning the New Testament covenant which supersedes the Old Testament, divorce is prohibited except in cases of unfaithfulness, and he or she who divorces his or her spouse except in cases of unfaithfulness commits adultery in remarriage, and forces the divorced spouse to do the same. That's not an obscure apocryphal understanding. It is in the Gospels.
If Friendship Village applies the term ‘marriage’ as marriage is understood in the Bible, then they should really be consistent and require life histories of their applicants to make sure that they are truly spouses in the Biblical sense, which they claim to apply so strictly. Right?
So President Trump, Senators Dole, McCain, and McConnell, Governors Sanford and Schwarzenegger, Representatives Barr and Gingrich would have a few asterisks on their applications.
Now, I understand that marriages can go bad for other reasons, and the God who instituted marriage does not want people to dwell in misery. But live by the law, die by the law. Or maybe do not be so selective with your forgiveness of people that God designed a little differently.
5
If the community of faith is like others I have visited, its residents behave in ways that violate any number of commandments. For example, pocketing sugar packages from the dining table, shunning a new resident who is as little younger and a little prettier than the existing residents, avoiding those with more advanced disabilities and bearing false witness against employees who follow the rules and don't give them an extra shrimp in their cocktails.
3
Bigotry and discrimination knows no boundaries in how it is applied. Religious based organizations are particularly skilled in rationalizing their right to discriminate by distorting "teachings" from their respective religious books. My advice to these two ladies who sound wonderful is to find a state nearby other than Missouri where their life choices would not be held against them.
2
Any organization that defines itself as "faith-based" is going to be discriminatory. It's doubtful that in the current climate these women will win their suit. Discrimination based on religious belief has been approved by the Supreme Court. Anyone is free to claim their religious belief allows them to discriminate against anyone else they disapprove of, or simply don't want to serve or live near--gays, Blacks, disabled, whoever. The bible's meaning can be twisted to defend just about anything, and today a court will buy just about any religion-based argument for discrimination. The government has shown that protecting the rights of the religious is paramount. Everyone else's rights come second.
1
I don't agree with the facility's policy, but then there are lots of other businesses that I don't care for the way they conduct themselves. Stop imposing yourself on them! Just go find another place where you're welcome.
Real Christians live by example, not dogma - actions, not empty words. They don't "pray on it" they just do it, because Jesus commanded us to do it, to love means to accept ... as is ... as we ourselves wish to be loved as who we are ... because God loved us as who we are. These two are legally married, have honorably spent decades of their lives together, and have committed no crime. If the people running this facility have such weak faith, believing this type of love to be a threat, perhaps they should pray on that weak faith - pray for strength to do what is right, not what is blatantly illegal and discriminatory.
4
After attending an entertainment event with my mother in her non-religious, for-profit assisted living center during which the "entertainer" launched into a "Thank God for Trump, Hollywood is evil" diatribe I understood the importance of hard and fast rules to protect nursing home residents from unwanted proselytizing.
4
It might not be tony enough for him, but sounds like the ideal retirement community for Mike Pence.
4
“a loving community that wishes only the very best for all people, including Ms. Walsh and Ms. Nance.”
I am so sick of these "loving" "Christians" saying one thing and doing the polar opposite.
4
I am 69, married to my same sex partner for 12 years but have been a couple for 32. We live in an "active adult" community in Arizona where there are no civil protections in housing or employment. Reading an article like this enrages me but clearly scares me as we consider where to live when we are no longer able to remain at home. Our current political environment makes the anger and anxiety much worse because, if the administration gets its way, anyone will be able to discriminate against us if they do not "approve" of us because of so-called religious or moral objections. This will be backed up by an activist SCOTUS. Already there are multiple reports of lgbtq people losing their church affiliated jobs in schools, pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions for people in transition, and multiple other things including basic commercial services whereby the requester of goods and services is not deemed good enough or morally appropriate. Although we have made tremendous progress in acceptance in our country there will be a return to dark days again but it will not, will not, shove lgbtq people back into the closet.
8
Though I know it would be a major burden for them, I hope many people currently residing at "Friendship" Village immediately notify the administration that they will be moving. Most religious organizations are far more sensitive to financial loss than the shame of hypocrisy.
4
Your religious beliefs should not justify discrimination. With that said, all I can offer is thank God I'm an atheist.
4
When it comes to housing facilities , I suspect the rules depend on whether the place receives public funding or is privately owned ( a number of churches operate retirement facilities ) .
If I were gay , I would Not want to live in a private church run facility regardless of how 'nice' the building might be .
As a Buddhist , I prefer Not to live in a place operated by any of the western religions , particularly one that set forth those kind of limitations .
I would call it 'lesson learned' and seek accommodations more in line with My lifestyle .
Expecting other old people set in their ways to change is a fools dream .
Friendship Village please recognize this perfect example of friendship. Marriage is a partnership, a hopefully lifelong relationship that only in the early years involves sex and reproduction. Please accept love for what it is, a gift from God.
4
Jesus' teachings were simple and direct. This statement attributed to him kind of says it all for those Christians who are confused by religious dogma: "If anyone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen." There you have it: follow religion and its inherent biases or follow Jesus. To "love" means to not deny anyone else the good we accept or want for ourselves. It is a simple but powerful teaching not only found in Jesus' teaching but also all the great sages and mystics in history.
5
As a pragmatic matter, Beverly and Mary will be better off in a more enlightened environment. If they can find one . . .
Since the ( inappropriately named) Friendship Village administration is outspoken in their bias, their residents must also be largely on board with their unfortunate "Christian"values. This is not a group of people I'd want to live with. One would choke on the fumes of the judgement in the air.
Some entrepreneur needs to figure out that gay people's need and and desire for continuing care is a big economic opportunity. We need to take our money elsewhere.
But, we should still sue these people.
2
Why am I not surprised this retirement community has policies that are stuck in the past?
1
A conservative majority on the Supreme Court has already allowed a significant portion of the 1964 Voting Rights Act to be demolished as well as giving the green light to states that have passed laws that make it darn near impossible for millions of women to access abortion services. And just recently they've said it's ok to discriminate against LGBT citizens as long as it's your "sincere religious belief" (which we all know is code for "right-wing Evangelical Christian belief" because God knows someone with sincerely held Church of Satan, Wiccan or Hindu beliefs would not be shown the same deference). And now with the almost certain confirmation of Kavanaugh, the conservative grip will only tighten. The Supreme Court doesn't have to overturn Roe v. Wade or reverse itself on the legality if same sex marriage. They only gave to wait for cases like this that will allow them to chip away at the hard won rights of women, minorities and LGBT folk until the "protections" are in name only.
2
Illegal, yes, but moreover, why would they want to live there?
Thank you Hobby Lobby ruling. Creeping into all aspects of society. Legal discrimination.
5
How many heterosexual relationships lasted 40 years or more with the same person? Seem committed to me. Yet, Friendship Village I doubt buts limits on the amount of divorces a spouse of a heterosexual couple that might be applying.. Didnt the bible talk about the sin of divorce too?
1
Awful. As I read another article today on States trying to rein in drug prices, how about they also add a law that facilities discriminating LBGT, same sex couples, race, et. al. are not subject for Medicare reimbursements. Their “religious beliefs” would change in an instant.
2
I was raised Catholic,studied Christianity and deeply respect the teachings of Christ. The ‘Evangelical Christians’ are the farthest thing from being Christian. They use Christ’s name for three things- profit (keeping donations for themselves), discrimination (general against LGBT and anyone brown) and to spread hate (demonizing ‘non-believers’). They have commandeered the cross and they were the very people Christ warned us about. There praise for Trump who is a Anti Christ figure — is the icing on the cake. They can’t hide anymore.
4
The fact is that the Bible nowhere defines marriage as being between a man and woman, so the clause fails on that count.
2
"As it is understood in the bible..."
Seems like the parts where Jesus clearly taught to care for the sick and elderly, and not be the judge and jury over others escaped them.
God is the moral judge, not these administrators. We humans are to take care of each other, to gain his favor, not to do his job for him here on earth. God determines the sin, and the verdict - not us.
But this story examples typical American Christianity. Its about doing the wrong thing in favor of some "as interpreted" lines in a book never sanctioned by their God, over doing the right and moral thing...because its the right and moral thing.
3
The solution is simple. There must be a law passed that any religiously oriented facilities which desire to discriminate must affix a signs on all entry/exits to said facility which reads something like:
"We are a _______ facility and do discriminate based on 'Gender Identification', 'Sexual Orientation', 'Current Marrital Status', 'Age', 'Skin Color', Political Party Affiliation', 'Educational level', and 'How much you're worth', etc., etc.. "
All lettering must be in 1-inch high letters, in black against a white background with a boarder of a 1/4-inch in Blood-Red, and the sign must be weather resistant and completely legible at all times. Make sure that adequate lighting is available on each sign for all night hours.
And then, charge them city, county, state, and federal taxes just like any other business in the vicinity.
1
“guided by our Christian faith,” it led “a loving community that wishes only the very best for all people, including Ms. Walsh and Ms. Nance.”
Your "Christian faith" is non-existent nor is it a "loving community." Friendship Village is built on hypocrisy and discrimination.
This is thoroughly disgusting. I hope these women win a huge lawsuit against this place that results in them owning the place.
3
The couple is absolutely free to go spend their money elsewhere.
1
How long are we going to have to fight this kind of discrimination? It appears with Trump in the White House and Jeff Sessions as AG it will be at least until we can get these dog-whistle purveyors out of office. Even then, with the likely composition of the SCOTUS it may never end in our lifetime. This is sickening. After such a long and concentrated struggle, to allow this is outrageous. It is clearly a whack-a-mole situation. No sooner do we get one ruling banning blatant discrimination, another discriminatory practice pops up. May this proceed through the courts and be successful.
2
While I disagree with the retirement community’s position, does this lesbian couple really want to live in a community that would be so hostile to them? They may have the law and what is right on their side, but what do they get for having the fight? A hobby that makes them feel righteous? I would rather shrug my shoulders and move on to a different community. Bigotry like this will burn itself out in a couple more generations.
@QED, first, I don't think the community itself would be hostile to them -- whoever wrote the policy is not likely to have day to day contact. The co-residents seemed friendly and accepting. If they chose a new community, it could likely have a more friendly policy, but less friendly residents. They might have walked away earlier in the process, but by the time they figured out about the discrimination, they were pretty thick into it. Is the community policing the sex lives of all the residents? What do they get for having the fight? Hopefully, when the law comes down on their side, all the ALF will look at their policies and adjust accordingly. Civil rights is not a "hobby". The subject at hand is where they are going to spend the rest of their lives.
3
@QED Assuming that it will burn itself out is part of the problem. This hasn't worked for racism, and won't work for this either.
3
@QED
Well, they don’t have a couple of more generations to live.
And you assume there are affordable places where they would be treated with respect.
Do you know that to be true, or is it your privilege operating?
2
As long as our courts continue to allow religious beliefs to override our nations laws and constitution this type of discrimination will go unchecked
2
Aside from whatever protection the law gives to this same-sex couple (in fact, the law is unsettled), it seems that they have a claim based upon the financial and other losses they suffered when they took action in reliance upon their apparent acceptance to the facility.
Based upon the facts stated in the article, they were open about their relationship, and made no effort to conceal it. Actions in reliance are a firm part of contract law, and if a Court finds their reliance was justified, it can order that they be admitted to the facility and/or receive a substantial payment in damages.
When a facility has an exclusionary policy, of any kind, at the very least its promotional literature should explicitly state that policy. In that way, potential applicants will not be misled, and statutes prohibiting such exclusion can be more easily drafted and enforced.
3
This is an interesting article, I expect it to go to the supreme court for a decision. I do wonder why nobody noticed that they probably were not sisters. It would be nice to see if they could have such a policy without the justification of religion, it could be accommodation of their targeted population.
“One thing so troubling about this case, and this time, is the argument that religious beliefs can justify discrimination."
I've been a liberal all my sentient life. And I have a thoroughly secular, non-religiously observant outlook on life. As a lawyer who represents clients in discrimination cases, I certainly understand the discriminatory aspects of this case. Nevertheless, it troubles me that the government, even for benign reasons, can override the private choices people make -- on private property -- as to who they wish to live among or deal with. I understand the basis for outlawing discrimination in private businesses that deal in interstate commerce and agree with this important pillar of the law that made the United States a more just and civilized country -- law that desegregated restaurants, bus stations, etc. But this is a private community. If this community believes that the Bible prohibits same sex marriage, why can't they live that way without government interference? I find this belief personally repugnant, but so what? No one is forcing me to live there, and I don't think my values should necessarily be turned into law governing other people's lives.
7
@Barry Schreibman
So a very few decades ago, would you apply the same "principle" to a black family who wanted to live in a subdivision that had a homeowners association with a whites-only covenant? I remember a neighborhood in Putnam County, WV, with signage announcing this covenant even in the 1970s. And some people thought and still think racial mixing is against God's will and thus justify racism through religion.
Google "whites only neighborhood covenant" and read what you find. Or take a look at this 2005 article from the Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/21/garden/restrictive-covenants-stubborn...
Or this article from the Baltimore Sun just one year ago:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bs-ed-0915-racial-cov...
Of course, no one was forcing black families to live in safe neighborhoods close to better schools, so what's the problem? They could just live somewhere else.
That racist covenants are today unenforceable is exactly the point. This retirement community says that units can be occupied by married couples. The couple is legally married. Unless the community's by-laws specify that a spouse must be of the opposite sex, and if this is not a religious community as such (like a monastery or Shaker village), then there is no legal basis for permitting this discrimination.
Why would I choose you as the lawyer to represent me in a discrimination case if you can't see this?
6
@Barry Schreibman Is it a "private community" that's only open to, and only solicited among, members of its faith-based "community"? Or is it marketed to the public at large?
1
@Barry Schreibman--If you are indeed a "lawyer who represents clients in discrimination cases," then you should be aware that even private, gated communities are
still bound by the laws of the country and state - so they would not be permitted to discriminate based on any protected class (gender, age, race, religion, etc.). This would include sexual orientation in jurisdictions which include it in protected class designations.
2
When we decided on a retirement community, we knew we wanted a non-profit, the possibility of dying in our apartment or if need be in a higher level of care at the same facility, and it was very important for us that the place we live in now had a set policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sex or religion or national origin or race or anything else.
This case is heartbreaking to me. While we are a man and a woman, married for 51 years next week, but we grew up in different countries, speaking two different languages, absorbing two different cultures. We relish people who are different from ourselves! Our window looks on a park, where all summer long nearby residents from India walk in the evening - complete with beautiful, multicolored saris.
Every family has gay members. Every community has them. Our former neighborhood had them. Are we to live in ghettos?
As for the God-fearing, remember the words of Jesus regarding judging others: “Let the one without sin throw the first stone.”
My best wishes to this couple in their lawsuit. May you live long and be healthy in your chosen community or another that publicly proclaims its non-discrimination.
21
@TheraP Great that you enjoy diversity. You are incorrect that every family has gay individuals. And many people especially in their later years don't want diversity in their community, at least not a lot of diversity.
1
@vulcanalex
It depends on what you mean by "family." If you count aunts, uncles, and cousins, then no: in my 60 years, I have never actually known such a family not to have at least one gay member. Some individuals know they can't share that part of their lives with family for fear of being harassed or ostracized, and some, though more rarely these days, deny that they're gay even when it's obvious to those around them.
So if you think your family tree is free of some kind of dreaded "gay gene," you are fooling yourself.
2
This issue will ultimately be decided not on legal or religious grounds but on money. LGBTQ persons who can afford to live in retirement communities will be welcomed when communities realize their money is just as spendable as a "one man one woman" couple's money. Cash is key, especially to Christian religions.
6
@Patty deVille
If your assumption were true, every church would welcome gay people. Sadly, that’s not true.
2
@Patty deVille - maybe in backwater Missouri the presence of same-sex couples would be a turn-off to future new residents, but, given the expense involved it's hard to believe they'd be turning paying customers away.
@Patty deVille. Nope. Many haters would rather go broke or shut down rather than adjust their beliefs.
2
If they had said the nature of their relationship is "roommates" would that have been acceptable to friendship village? Or would they grant them two separate apartments? The cost of senior housing is increasing nearly as fast as college. You pretty much will have to double up in the future to afford assisted living.
4
I wonder if friendship village residents will have service cuts as the board has to pay the escalating costs of litigation?
Will they have to pay higher fees for a policy they never voted on?
7
“The first, irrevocable, requisite of a democratic society is the secular nature of the state, its total independence from ecclesiastical institutions, which is the only way of guaranteeing the preservation of the common interest over individual interests, and the absolute freedom of beliefs and religious practices among citizens, without any form of privilege or discrimination…A secular state is not the enemy of religion; it is a state that, in order to preserve the freedom of its citizens, has removed religious practice from the public sphere into the private sphere, which is where it belongs. Because when religion and the state become confused, freedom irremediably disappears. By contrast, when they are kept separate, religion tends slowly but inevitably to become more democratic, that is, each church learns to coexist with other churches and other forms of belief, and to tolerate agnostics and atheists. This process of secularization has made democracy possible.”
Notes on the Death of Culture, Mario Vargas Llosa, 2012
It would have been helpful to know about FVSH’s funding stream. If they’re providing their services completely altruistically and no money is changing hands, so be it. If their services are for sale, and particularly if they receive any federal or state money (grants, Medicare), welcome to the secular world.
18
@itsmildeyes By your estimation the government should stay out of this, it is not a public accommodation, but rather a private service where they should be able to select their customers. That would mean some would want to live there and others not. Now personally I would not as a business decline them.
Respectfully, @vulcanalex, you miss Llosa's point. You may wish to reread the selection.
FVSH appears to me to be operating in the public sphere. They are selling a service in the same way a luncheonette serves grilled cheese sandwiches. To whom would you not serve lunch? Providing they were law-abiding citizens, based on what?
1
You'd think people who give elder care would be a little more cognizant of the fact that human beings, whether they are raising children or not, still need affection, companionship, and mutual personal support no matter how old they are. Maybe especially as our lives enter the challenges that fading into our sunsets presents.
I have been a single woman for a very long time, and now that I'm in my senior years yearn for a female partner to share those remaining years, because non-social sphere companionship becomes more important. I cut out male partner because many men in our age group still cling to old fashioned notions of wives being subservient to husbands. The ones that don't, have been and still are married to happy wives for many years and not available.
18
@Entera
There are still single men out there who meet your expectations. I count myself as one, but I find the interesting women already married or checked out of the dating pool. Dating sites were not satisfying either. One thinks, oh well, I will meet someone the old fashioned way. But I think, bottom line, there just isn't the same desire, or passion, to overcome the roadblocks we all erect to protect ourselves. Hope you find the woman you seek.
2
@Entera I totally agree with you. I have been in a 10-year relationship with an old high school flame; we are in our mid-60's and live apart by choice. If I ever had to share living quarters with another person, however, I would actually prefer living with a gay woman or man whose interests, energy level and lifestyle is more akin to mine.
I know a lot of single men around my age, but in all honesty, my single girlfriends and I, many of us who have been married and/or have grown children, would rather not have to take care of or cater to the needs of many of the men we know who still hold outdated ideas about women and how "we should be".
Unfortunately, in the "happy" marriages I see around me, the wives' wants and desires are almost always subservient to her husbands', which to many of us is a one-sided happiness.
3
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
---Steven Weinberg
Welcome to Fake Friendship Village !
64
Agreed! A name change is definitely in order: "Fairweather Friendship Village" perhaps? Or "Conditional Friendship"? "Fine-print Friendship?" Good luck to them and I hope they win their case.
5
Socrates--I always look forward to your opinions. This one is enlightening, as usual. "Religion poisons everything."
3
Now that's not very nice at all, not very friendly of the Friendship Village .... I wonder how the residents feel about this. I might have missed that in the article. I saw where they were very friendly, most people they met, in the initial meetings.... Lots of new legal questions, But I should think that The Village is going to pay dearly. Like free living for a long time for Ms Nance & Walsh.... But then again, the Baker didn't have to bake that cake. I think this is different though.
19
@Doctor Woo It is somewhat the same, not being a public accommodation they should be able to select those customers that they think best.
@Doctor Woo:
After this, I'm not sure I would want to live there! These are not nice people!
1
This is what happens when essential social services are delegated to a private sector that includes many faith-based organizations.
Hospitals which receive state and federal dollars, in our supposedly modern era, should not be run according to sectarian dogma. Retirement communities relying on state and federal dollars to enable them to provide medical and nursing services should not be able to impose sectarian values on prospective residents.
It's quite ironic that nations having established or state churches are light-years ahead of us in providing nonsectarian social services to their citizens, while we flounder here.
45
I don't know the answer here; our Constitution and our laws protect freedom of religion, and also prohibit many forms of discrimination and guarantee equal protection of the laws. There is a conflict, and perhaps the burden falls on SCOTUS to resolve it.
Personally, I think more weight should be given to the right to be free from discrimination, but this is a complicated issue. There are non faith based retirement homes to which LGBT couples could turn. Do we wish to outlaw single-sex colleges?
One thing to remember. This article emphasizes the role of the religious right in undermining the right to be free from discrimination. But it's likely the left, including the NY Times, that has done more to enable discrimination through support of Affirmative Action. As practiced today, Affirmative Action is blatant discrimination.
O
9
@Alex
Friendship Village limits the occupancy of shared units to family members -- including spouses. Walsh and Nance are *legally* married.
End of story.
25
Alex...this country (and its former colonies) has had informal Affirmative Caucasian Action 'laws' for 400 years.
Stop acting liking a white victim.
I am white, for the record.
16
Too right, Socrates! I am also white and couldn’t agree with you more. I love the Steven Weinberg quote as well.
1
The author gets the cake baker part wrong. The supreme court decided that case on a technicality involving inappropriate comments at the Colorado Human Rights Commission hearing. The issue of whether people of "faith" can discriminate has been remanded and thus was specifically not decided. The bakers lawyers are taking a bizarre tack in any event, arguing that the baker's first amendment rights (as a creative person) were violated. That's different than an argument regarding faith. The facility in this article will lose and lose badly. They deserve to lose a lot of money on this issue.
57
This is not a public accommodation on Main Street, but more akin to a private organization or gated community. They have every right to discriminate if they so choose. It’s called freedom of association.
14
DRS....it's much closer to a public accommodation and an all-white country club.
It's called free-DUMB of bigotry and it belongs in the dustbin of bigoted Christian history.
81
If it gets Medicare reimbursements, it is subject to federal law.
7
Not really. Your religious freedoms as protected in the Constitution are not unlimited. None of the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights are. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater; you can’t carry guns in certain sensitive areas; you can’t print libelous claims in a newspaper, and, you cannot deny the civil rights of others because you’ve cherry picked some passage in a work of science fiction that you believe gives you a free hand in treating others without the dignity they deserve.
What disturbs me the most about religious adherents running to the Constitution for all matters of protection from perceived “persecution” is that you claim the Bible is above the rule of man, and therefore you really have no use for civil or secular laws at all. Religious hypocrisy has no limits.
This retirement center like so many other places needs to update it's policies to current state and federal laws, or close it's doors for good.
47
Women over all tend to outlive men and there are most likely more women of retirement age than men. I can see many women of my acquaintance wanting to room with a friend in their old age, if single, never married, divorced or widowed, both for the economy and, more important, the friendship and sharing of daily life. This situation at this institution is discrimination on every level. How many widowed women, or men, would love to share the living arrangements with a friend, but this facility would, it seems, be opposed to that as well.
60
@Kristine bean According to the story told in the paper it seems that if the couple had just said that they were friends and not mentioned "marriage" there would not have been an issue. Your hypothetical is based upon what you are trying to prove rather than the facts as presented.
In a statement, the vice president of its board of directors said they were “guided by our Christian bigotry, spite and ill will”
Welcome to Bigotry Village !
(White Heterosexual Christians ONLY)
110
I have seen too much discrimination based upon ‘religion’ that it has made me rethink what religion contributes to the society and/personhood.
As others have noted, all federal and state aid should be curtailed. Their friends and colleagues who live there should have some impact - or are they too, discriminating through their silence.
102
I have often commented on Times articles to say that Christians want to use "freedom of religion" as an excuse to impose their beliefs on others. They don't feel free until they can dominate others. That is what they have in common with Trump.
Freedom of religion protects doctrinal practice, habits of worship, and beliefs. It does not mean you get to discriminate against others in secular realms such as housing.
When love and commitment lasts for 40 years, it should be celebrated as a rare and beautiful thing. It makes me sick that this lovely couple would be treated with such disregard and contempt. Vote in November for many reasons, but this article give us a shameful example of one of them: protecting your LGBTQ neighbors.
216
@C Wolfe Well said.
I'd like to know if the retirement home is tax exempt as a "religious organization." If so, these women have been paying taxes to make up for that lost revenue. If they discriminate against tax-paying g citizens, the home should lose its tax-exempt status.
164
@Dogmom:
So should all churches!
2
Simple. If the board of Friendship Village decides to use biblical "law" (as they define it) to determine their operation, then they should receive no government money in the form of Medicaid payments, tax breaks, or tax deductions for donors. They should cease to be a public accommodation and serve only members of a specific church or group, with specific criteria for membership. Otherwise, they are a public accommodation and must abide by the law of the land to serve all who qualify for services. These women are legally married.
My understanding from one of the comments is that this is not a decision made by residents, but a decision made by a board without resident input. If that is the case and residents want to protect their investment, residents should find a way to dislodge the board. Otherwise, they'll find all of their money going to lawsuits instead of maintenance.
203
@JO That's Medicare, not Medicaid--typo!
Everyday there is another example of Christians using their selective interpretation of their religious text to further discrimination towards groups of people they don't like. One's religious practices starts in their hearts but must end at the edge of their front yard. We cannot let a group of any religious followers infuse hateful or discriminatory values upon others to the degree that negatively impacts people's basic rights as citizens. Fundamentally speaking, one's religious rights must be subordinate to the basic civic rights required of all. We need freedom from religion more than freedom of religion.
150
@Randy
These are not "christians" per se, but Evangelists, who are a radical fringe group.
Most of these "faith-based communities" would not recognize the founder of their faith as he preached tolerance and love and not the opposite.
159
@Stephen Kurtz Plus, marriage 'as it is in the Bible' includes forced commitment after rape, forced commitment of a widow to her husband's brother, and, of course, regular old patriarchal polygamy, including consorts. Good luck.
3
@Stephen Kurtz — He’d barely make it through the door. They’d take one look at Jesus and his raggedy clothes and call 911.
3
As someone who is agnostic (my background is Protestant), I used to say to myself... "I may not agree with people of faith but I am sure they are nice, salt-of-the-earth types."
But as we are seeing from the overwhelming support that Trump gets from the evangelical community, these are NOT nice people at all. They are, in fact, remarkably twisted.
305
@Engineer There is a movie in which one actor speaks to another actor about the "salt of the earth people" after being berated because he is black. After a few more lines, he states those salt of the earth people "they are, you know, morons".
My thoughts about those "christians" also.
2
I think that "faith based" operations such as retirement facilities, hospitals and the like should be able to select who they serve, provided they do not get any government money, and that they do not get any tax breaks. Moreover, contributions to such entities should not be tax deductible.
99
They wouldn’t be able to survive without Medicare and tax exempt status.
6
@Butch you forgot several other things that they need to forgo in order to discriminate: use of public roads and utilities, police, fire and EMS services, the US banking system, and on and on. "Private" organizations and businesses are a fiction created by people who like neither their neighbors nor this nation that enables them.
2
@Butch - So they can also exclude Jews, Blacks, and "people of Mediterranean ancestry" (as one area near me once proscribed).
4
"“One thing so troubling about this case, and this time, is the argument that religious beliefs can justify discrimination,” said Michael Adams, chief executive of Sage, an advocacy group for L.G.B.T. seniors."
I find this appalling. The discrimination is blatant--what if they had simply been straight friends, trying to cut costs by sharing an a
CCRC appartment? Would they have been denied then?
It's also appalling that the residence was eager to get their hands on their cash UNTIL they found out their relationship? What business is it to Friendship House to poke into their personal affairs?
These places are expensive but great place for seniors without children to look after them in their old age. I'm planning to move to one near my home because of the long-term security they to age in place with services on site.
And one is a professor? CCRCs are attractive for their culture, many are education based. To think how much they would add to the residence is really sad.
Good for them for suing. Anyone getting on in years should be interested in this case.
187
@ChristineMcM writes: "... what if they had simply been straight friends, trying to cut costs by sharing an a
CCRC appartment? Would they have been denied then?"
Yes. Friendship Village's cohabitation policy limits the occupation of shared units to family members -- including spouses. As a legally married couple, Walsh and Nance are eligible.
5
@ChristineMcM
And there are many of us who would be delighted to share a retirement community with you, Christine.
However, it appears that the couple would indeed have been denied a unit if they had been straight friends seeking to share housing costs. The limited forms of relationship between two people sharing a unit is spelled out in the contract. That is precisely what makes the denial outrageous—the contract specifically says that spouses may share a unit, and Mary and Beverly are married.
3
@ChristineMcM: don't be rooked in by CRCCs. They appear to offer "continuous care" but it is not true. I've toured some, and been told that if you require assisted living or nursing home care....and they do not have a space for you at that time....you will have to pay out of pocket for a home health aide or other services, until a space opens. They do NOT guarantee you that they will always be able to fulfill your needs! Most do not have enough AL or nursing home spaces for every resident who enters as a younger, healthy senior!
Also, the cost of CRCCs is obscene.
As most CRCC's are run by churches, they are well within their legal rights to value traditional marriage and anything else they want. They are not state-run or federal-run nursing homes.
1
As a resident of Friendship Village in Chesterfield, Missouri, I offer a viewpoint from the “inside”. In spite of changes in the law, the Board of Directors of Friendship Village decided to maintain their long-standing policy of refusing applicants for residency who were same sex married couples. In doing so, they put their religious dogma of intolerance and exclusion ahead of their duty to follow the law and responsibly administer the affairs of our community. This decision was taken in the face of strong objections from the management of LCS Corp who had been managing the two campuses in St Louis for over forty years. Shortly after the change in the law, LCS Corp, was sacked by the board. Was the timing of the board’s decision to dump LCS was related to the policy disagreement? We don't know. Board meetings at the holding company level where the decision to discriminate was made have no resident participation or input. Meetings are secret. Notes are not published. Now we are being sued for our discriminatory behavior, justifiably in my opinion, and likely the first lawsuit of many to come. The response from the board so far? “We did it to protect you”. “We’re praying on it”! “Don’t talk to the press.”
Honorable people would apologize, make amends and resign in disgrace.
829
@philzimm
This is an instance when current residents could have a critical impact. Tell the Board that going forward you will refuse to recommend the community to anyone looking, that you will inform them of the discriminatory policies and recommend that - straight or gay -- they look someplace else. It's important current residents fight these policies as well. Ask for a review and report from the Board of discrimination policies -- bug them until it's not worth their position. Pressure from the inside is just as important as a suit brought from outside.
24
@philzimm I would think the residents would be concerned about the financial fallout of this decision.
It would be a good idea to find out more about who exactly owns your home and your living environment, especially since they don't care about your views.
It sure looks like they only care about getting your money.
7
@philzimm Hate-based evangelical fundamentalist Christians persecutors are not honorable people.
And while they'll be the very first to scream that they are victims when held accountable for their intolerance, they would gladly take seniors' last dime and then kick them onto the curb for being 'sinners'.
We have to quit tolerating hate-based religions.
Thank you for your willingness to speak up. If you need peaceful protesters and demonstrations, we can make that happen.
3
Jesus could mingle with lepers, prostitutes, etc, ( not to mention give his life to save sinners) but the "good" people of "Friendship Village" cannot abide a gay couple in their midst. How could this possibly be anything remotely Christian?
456
The Bible impossibly and consistently contradicts itself, and its adherents simply cherry pick the parts that reinforce their worldview, and discard the rest. Kind of like reading the news or listening to talk radio these days.
2
@jeketels In this case, Christian should be state in the lower case "christian" as there is nothing Christian about them or their activities.
@jeketels
As usual the "Pense" Christians have no relationship with what Jesus taught.
2
Ah Christians, people who live by the words of Jesus: "A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another." Only maybe not this time. Sometimes they make me prayerfully and thoughtfully nauseous.
224
And our church leaders wring their hands and wonder why young people are increasingly classifying themselves as "None" on questions of religious affiliation.
321
I have learned over the course of many years that as soon as someone says that s/he or the committee will prayerfully look at the situation it means that they will confirm their own religious beliefs. If they are devout they will ignore the parts of their religion concerning kindness to others. I've seen it happen when it comes to my handicapped brother. I've experienced it myself as Jewish lesbian.
Ronald Reagan was wrong: the scariest words in America are not necessarily from our government unless it's indulging religious extremists. The scariest words come from those claiming to be under the influence of religion and its "laws".
125
@hen3ry The scariest words are: "We will pray for you." When a "religious person" says that to you it really means: "I don't see you as a person."
5
Friendship Village is not a christian run facility, but fake christians all.
72
They're behaving very much like Christians, at least the Christians of 2018.
74
@Jacquie
That's a little too convenient. Apparently, this is exactly how some Christians behave.
@Barry Short The "Christians of Jefferson Sessions" will smite all of us.
Imagine the rulings from the Supreme Court on matters like this if Kavanaugh is confirmed.
149
@JFarwell: the Supreme Court -- without Kavanaugh! -- affirmed the Masterpiece bakery case IN FAVOR OF THE BAKER and his Christian beliefs, by 7-2 -- meaning it was not a "liberal vs. conservative" split.
1
Biblical definition of marriage? Do they mean like Jacob with his two wives, or Solomon with 700?
598
@Martha Shelley
And don't forget the slave concubines.
5
@Martha Shelley
Or divorce consisting of walking around your tent three time saying "I DIVORCE YOU...."
3
@Martha Shelley I've always been puzzled by the expansion of the human family from Adam and Eve and two sons. How does the bible explain that? Just a rhetorical question.
5
"We are prayerfully and thoughtfully reviewing this issue.”
Hahahahahahahahaha!! That gave me a belly laugh. Translation: "We are trying to figure out if we are going to get away with this, or if it's going to cost us too much in legal costs to be worth it, in which case it will suddenly turn out that our moral principles are significantly more flexible than we first let on."
OMG. Religion. It is what it is.
The vice president of the board is deluded, hypocritical, demonstrably insincere, unctuous, full of false concern for others ... oily. I grew up with people like this. They make my skin crawl.
Haven't read all comments, but I wonder if I'm the only one who takes offense at this community calling itself "Friendship Village." I wonder if they are trying to make people think they are Quaker (who call themselves "Friends"). Quaker facilities, however, do not discriminate against gay people, or anyone else. THAT's friendship.
287
Spouses are spouses. Love is love. Beverly and Mary are in as committed a relationship as it gets - more so than many heterosexual marriages of which I am aware.
Denying them the right to live at Friendship Village is about the least “Christian” thing I can imagine. A religion promoting fear, exclusion, and hateful behavior is not godly in the least.
Friendship Village is a misnomer. I hope these ladies find a welcoming, embracing community.
171
The only thing I’d add is that love doesn’t exist. Never has never will. Ego does, however.
3
You’re very, very wrong about love. It’s the organizing principle of the universe.
3
I am not surprised by the exclusion of this couple- any time I read "faith based" or "based upon the Bible" I know what comes next -discrimination against one who is not Christian nor conforms to so-called biblical standards. I hope they win their discrimination case - but short of a court order they will not be able to move into this CCRC. How they will then be treated by the residents and those who manage this facility may not be pleasant. This makes a mockery of so-called "Christian" values. I hope they can find another CCRC that is not run by hypocrites.
81
@fuzzpot Judging by one of the NYT Picks, it is the board that is discriminatory, not the residents. This seems confirmed by the fact that this couple still wants to live there, which indicates that they felt accepted by the people they met when visiting.
15
I can hope they win their case, are given a monetary settlement, use it to buy their new residence and revel in the fact they prevailed.
2
I live in a CCRC, Oak Hammock at the University of Florida in Gainesville. There were two same sex couples living here when I moved in who were accepted as part of the community. Come join us. Oak Hammock and many other communities welcome diverse residents.
197
While i absolutely do not believe in this type is discrimination, I would not want to live my retirement years in a place where I would experience hate and disapproval.
It’s time for the LGBTQ community to start their own retirement communities. I’m not suggesting they stop fighting against discrimination but if everyone who lives around you has similar values and opinions, it makes it easier. One’s golden years should be as stress free as possible.
54
@A. Cato--LGBTQ retirement communities already exist across the country, in cities such as Austin, Atlanta, Tampa, Phoenix and Orlando. Other locations include Salt Lake City, Utah, Columbus, Ohio, Aurora, Colorado, and Dallas, Texas. More are opening all the time to serve the growing population of ageing gay people. A little research can find a community to suit just about anyone.
@A. Cato
OUCH.
1. You are advocating for separate but equal...
2. You are also advocating that all of us surround ourselves only with people with similar values and opinions.
In a country that is already splintering we need more tolerance, and more openness to disagreement without personal attacks or discrimination. Both are in lamentably short supply.
8
@A. Cato
No!!!!! Why force them into ghettos?
I don’t want to live in a ghetto. And I’m not gay. We live in a retirement community that advertises its non-discrimination policy. One policy for employes and residents alike!
8
Discrimination is obviously still alive and well and as long as there is a Trump mentality coursing through parts of America, people need to adjust to its existence. Remember the Gay wedding cake.
Ms. Walsh and Ms. Nance, despite the appeal of this particular Friendship Village, seek another residence and get on with your retirement. What can possibly come of your suit other than loss of time and a great deal of money.
By turning you away, Friendship Village has already badly damaged their reputation.
94
@Cone Following through with your suggestion would be one way to handle it.............but I remember a lot of young, brave black students sitting at lunch counters to stand up against discrimination and oppression.
2
@Cone
I sent in my comment a day ago and from the tome of the comments I am seeing now, I would say that Friendship Village needs to read these comments.
Their reputation is already suffering and it is well deserved.
1
@Cone What can be accomplished? Making sure that this doesn't happen to others. You might not realize this, but it's not always about yourself.
4
The cohabitation policy allows spouses to live together.
They are married, so there should be no problem.
223
@turbot
"Should" be, but alas, religion.
It must be a burden to live an entire life terrified and in fear of what happens afterwards and throughout trying to conform to some HUMAN BEING'S (not god's) ideal of what YOU should be.
2
@turbot: there are lots of retirement communities for this lesbian couple, that would be very happy to have them.
THIS COMMUNITY is church-based and religious, hence it is not appropriate for a lesbian couple.
I grew up attending a Christian church - several times a week - finally as church organist for several years.
What I learned was hypocrisy - exhorted to 'go out and witness' to save souls, instead the attendees huddled together like scared kittens afraid of the outside world.
“Life in Lubbock, Texas taught me two things: One is that God loves you and you're going to burn in hell. The other is that sex is the most awful, filthy thing on earth, and you should save it for someone you love.” - Butch Hancock
121
Religion has always been about tribalism; without the 'other' to call your enemy, you have no way to distinguish your own superiority. No way to justify your particular, chosen set of comfortable biases. It's sad.
76
Terrible that Friendship (?) Village would do this to these women. I hope Ms. Walsh and Ms. Nance will reconsider moving into that creepy place and take a look at The Gatesworth instead.
Better in every way. No religious requirements, and no buy-in required. (Come for a visit!) Wonderful staff. Great food. Etc.
http://www.thegatesworth.com
54
@Pecan: it looks just lovely ... like a resort! but what does it cost? without prices....it's just another "Big Lie".
90% of seniors cannot even dream of these "chandelier" facilities that cost $250K and up to even ENTER and often $5000-$10,000 PER MONTH.
3
My heart goes out to these two women. Unfortunately, laws will never change the human condition. Despite gay marriage, parents still go through a metamorphosis when a child comes out to them. The mere act of "having to come out" implies a differentiation from the norm. There will always be those who struggle with differences; those who will discriminate and those who downright hate. If Hitler could send myriad of homosexuals to the concentration camps in this lifetime, what can you expect from society and people in general?
28
It sounds as though they might be surprised to learn that Heaven is filled with people from every nation and walk of life, as Christ commanded his disciples to preach to them so that they may be saved. The ticket to Heaven-if you are Christian- is not being white, heterosexual or of any particular denomination. Rather, it is to believe that God sent Christ who died for our sins. I do not want to live out my final decades in some artificial conclave filled with people who only look like me. As a white, heterosexual, Christian, middle-aged woman, I am hoping to retire in a community enriched by people of all races, denominations, politics, sexual identities, gender identities, from different continents, countries and states. We enjoy this so much when we travel and seek it out.
My Lutheran grandmother had the best treatment and care ever when she stayed at a Jewish health rehab. If someone doesn't believe what your religion believes, it won't affect your own relationship with God.
I hope their minds will open, and reflect the same grace that Christ extended to us.
66
When I was 12, 57 years ago, my church met about what to do if black people tried to attend our Sunday Service. This was stylish during the Civil Rights Movement. Of course, my town had no black residents and black people would probably feel very uncomfortable attending our white church every Sunday plus the long drive. It was just to mark the issue. Our church elders decided they would not let them in. Good Southern Baptists. I stopped going to their 'church'.
301
Religious bigotry expressed through real estate and predatory behavior. Given the fact that most of their 'services' are undoubtedly paid for through Medicare, Medicaid and/or Social Security funding, it might be worth going that route to sue their collective socks off. For myself, I really think I'll stay well away from this lot.
82
"Friendship Village" is nondenominational and "faith based." The policy of discrimination they are trying to use is based on "marriage . . . as it is understood in the Bible."
Where, in which version of their "Bible," do they intend to cite as a defense in court?
Do all the couples who live (and have lived) at this CCRC fit their policy?
They are destine to end up harming more couples than just Mary and Beverly.
33
How is the governing body of the community to know what goes on behind closed doors? Should it? Why, exactly?
If a hetero married couple has given up sex and has never had children, would they be considered "married as understood in the Bible?" What exactly does "marriage as understood in the Bible" mean? No "unusual sexual practices," perhaps?
If a members of a hetero marriage drink to excess, curse at the neighbors, commit violence toward one another, and deal drugs, would that be better to have in your community than a quiet same-sex couple?
The governors of the retirement community need to get a life and quit poking their noses into the lives of others.
63
The point of religion is now to find another basis for exclusion. To say that I get something and you don’t because my god says so. My god is bigger than your god.
This type of nonchristian behavior combined with the greedy guts evangelicals who support an amoral greedy conman have completely undermined christianity.
No wonder churches are emptying out for good.
Interestingly the Mormons recognize the complete breakdown and are now trying to rebrand themselves...but they have the same problem regardless of name change.
36
How "christian" of Friendship Village. Jesus would be so proud of their discriminatory practice! I am so tired of people hiding closeted bigotry behind the iron curtain of Christianity/religion. Practicing humanity, not religiosity, is the goal of civilized human behavior.
50
It's apparent Friendship Village does NOT know or UNDERSTAND the true meaning of LOVE! Great Scot! When will LOVE overcome HATE???
26
Remember the phrase MYOB--we need to bring it back. They are legally married, let them in with all benefits and discounts--and protect them against vicious violent bigots.
27
@StarLawrence: which is why Obergefell and Windsor were such tragic disasters for America.
But that's a legal question for another day.
THIS question is "does a religious-run institution have the right to set THEIR OWN religious standards, based on their religious beliefs"?
This was already addressed by both Masterpiece Bakery and Hobby Lobby decisions from SCOTUS.
1
I just can't.
8
Really? Get with the times Friendship Village -- I know many members of the LGBQT community -- good people.
10
There are good and bad; if they pay their rent, they’re good...enough.
There might be some legal precedent supporting Walsh and Nance's case: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/04/06/federal-fa... .
U.S. District Judge Raymond P. Moore in Denver cited a 1989 Supreme Court case--Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins--in his opinion, indicating that bias against a woman judged insufficiently feminine, among other things, by male partners was a form of sexual stereotyping and therefore fit the definition of sex in Title VII, the law barring job discrimination.
Would it be surprising if this Missouri case made it to the SCOTUS?
5
They've only been together for forty years--it may not last.
Faith-based EVERYTHING should be shut down.
64
@GreaterMetropolitanArea
Although I wouldn't shed a tear if "faith-based everything were shut down," I don't think that's legal. Or even desirable for society as a whole so long as religious beliefs aren't imposed on others.
However, any discriminatory organization should not receive a single dollar of taxpayer money. Medicare, reduced property taxes, social security, health insurance, food--anything not secured through private initiative.
9
@HeartEvery religion is, to a lesser or greater extent, discriminatory. Would you not allow any deductions for any religion? Or just those religions you agree with?
You are, of course, entitled to that view, but most people in the US would disagree.
If any entity labels itself "faith based" one can assume discrimination.
58
@BB Fernandez
Yeah they're basically synonyms aren't they.
15
Hey, they can do all the bible-stuff they want. But no Medicare or Medicaid funds for them. I'm not having MY tax money pay for their religion. That's freedom "from" religion.
128
@Leslie DurrMedicare and Medicaid pay for medical services, not for religious practices.
@Leslie Durr Think again. Your Medicare and Medicaid dollars support thousands of church-owned hospitals all over the country that are free to restrict reproductive services and requested end of life care - clinically needed and legal services - based solely on their religious beliefs.
2
“As marriage is understood in the Bible.” There you have it. I suppose I could purchase a unit and help these ladies by stating they are both my wives “as understood in the Bible”? While I’m sure that this is disappointing news to this couple, I can’t help but wonder why they don’t sue for breach of contract, then take the settlement and count themselves lucky to find out why a lot of us cheer for the lion instead of the Good Christian. Good? For what?
43
why would these women want to live here? i would look for a more progressive community.
17
@marie Bernadette
They may not really wish to, any longer, it may be the legal point. Or, maybe they have friends there whom they saw themselves socializing with, or family nearby, or particular features or amenities were right for them. Maybe they LIKED it. Maybe they know that even if the board of directors have their heads up their you-know-what's, most members of the community are welcoming. It's possible.
29
Maybe there are limited choices.
2
The vice president of its board of directors said the complex was "a loving community ." Yes, we love you so much that we don't want anything to do with you. Who would Jesus discriminate against?
48
@Linda Jesus would not discriminate against anyone.
1
I have to say that any retirement community that bills itself as "faith-based" isn't a community that, gay or straight, rational people should retire to.
Faith and rationality so often do not go hand in hand.
I know some gay people are religious. But caveat emptor, they need to do due diligence.
Which isn't to say I condone discrimination based on gender or sexual identity. I'd like a congress, Supreme Court, and president who believe in a secular democracy. Freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom to dominate and condemn.
44
I was on the fence with the Colorado baker case, but this is clear discrimination. We are either a country where all kinds of people are treated the same way or not. This case may bring this conflict between the rights of the religious vs the rights of any one person to a single decision point as it makes it way to SCOTUS (as I am sure it will). It will be interesting to see where Gorsuch and Kavanaugh land? I suspect that will tell us a lot about what our country will value over the next 40 years.
36
you can not teach an old dog new tricks,I think an elderly community should be allowed to live the rest of their lives in the kind of community that they choose,understanding that there is no monopoly of such communities.
@Dr. Dow
3
So, if they wanted to be white-only, that would be OK as long as the residents are elderly? At what age is being a bigot acceptable?
11
@Barry Short I have a problem with white only. I have no problem with Christian only, and I am not. It has to do with rationality, freedom of association, and the history of the United States,
The law is built around differences, some subtle.
Some of these continuing care communities, perhaps most or all, also discriminate against single applicants who must pay higher fees than couples. Nor may they live with a close friend. I find this entirely unacceptable and of course it mostly applies to discrimination against women since they are frequently widowed, divorced for a younger woman, and due to a lifetime of discrimination have fewer financial resources.
133
@S. Bernard
Absolutely: after first cringing at reading how this married couple was treated and refused even the right to apply, it occurred to me how a near majority of my friends over 70 would also be automatically rejected - they're single, divorced, widowed.
The "family unit" has changed in all age groups. For older adults living on their own, sharing a home has many benefits. Those personal benefits also benefit the CCRC - because people can remain longer in independence when they have the small supports of "family."
30
@S. Bernard
In our CCRC, there are two types of fees each month. One is for the apartment itself. The other is based on the number living there. That second number doubles for couples. But everyone alike pays the apartment fee. (That might appear discriminatory as 2 live cheaper than 1, but the bill makes it clear what’s being paid for.)
I suggest people carefully look at the monthly fee and what goes into it.
1
“The term ‘marriage’ as used in this policy means the union of one man and one woman, as marriage is understood in the Bible,” the policy noted.
Exactly which Bible is that? Now I'm just a simple country lawyer and not one o' your fancy city slicker theologians (speaking figuratively here), but as I recall the Bible CLEARLY understands that marriage is between one man and as many women as he can hold captive. Did I miss something?
524
What you’re missing is that the Bible is a work of science fiction at its very worst, or is at least a work of collected fictional religious dogma written thousands of years before the scientific age could properly debunk its claims. The civil rights and dignity of our fellow human beings is greater than your need to discriminate based on a work of sordid fiction.
4
if you open a church,pretty soon it will become a mega church!@tcement
1
Archaic rules, as is most of that Bible.
39
@TomTom Plus Jesus never mentioned or referred to homosexuality--which is a factor for 2% of the population or something like that and has been since the beginning of time.
16
Lordy!
Let these folks - be they bakers, florists, or retirement community owners - leave our secular country and establish elsewhere the christian theocracy they so desperately want to live in.
367
@VLMc As a gay man, I sympathize with the concerns of this couple, but a a lawyer I think this is a bad time to be bringing a federal lawsuit. Masterpiece Cake punted the main issue because Justice Kennedy is pro gay rights. His replacement won't be. For their own sake and everyone else's, they should forget this and go back to the Lutheran community.
@VLMcNo. They do not want to impose a theocracy. They just want t o live with people who share their view of their religion. As far as I can see, they are not hateful, they generally obey the secular law, and they bother nobody.
If they were an Amish retirement community restricted persons of the Amish faith, would you make them accept non-Amish?
@VLMc You wouldn't want to wish that upon another country would you? Cold!
We need to clean up our own messes!
This week, the article that was most interesting to me was, “A Retirement Community Turned Away These Married Women” by Paula Span. It was about an incident that occurred outside St. Louis, having to do with a retirement home called Friendship Village. Two women, Mary Walsh and Beverly Nance are a married couple who are both retired, and just wanted to go into a retirement community. When they found one that they liked, they applied. They met all the criteria except for one thing. According to this community, a marriage should be between a man and a women because that’s what it says in the bible. The couple was then denied access from the home and turned away. Other people have opened up about this and said they’ve had the same experience, if not worse. The administrators there have treated some people with such little respect, it blows my mind. People have undergone physical harrassment as well there, by other members of the community and its administrators.
This article stood out to me because this is a very real and very big problem in America that is sill not solved. Same sex marriage is legal now, so discrimination against couples of same sex marriage should no longer be legal or tolerated. It’s 2018, and we all need to start accepting that not everyone is the same. Just because people have different beliefs, it shouldn’t mean you deny them with your help, care and service. These are real people with real feelings who don’t deserve this at all.
73
@bengal11rosa050402
I dont neccesarily disagree with you. But it seems to me that there are some fundamental ideas that are being assumed but not supported in your statements.
So let me ask you, Why is it in wrong to discriminate? what in the realm of natural sciences do you base this concept of fairness upon? What empirical or experimental data supports this concept that non discrimination is "right" ? If we are meerly animals, then why is it "wrong" o act like them? And what proof is there that we are not merely animals?
Im not trying to be terribly difficult, but science alone does not even the question what is right or wrong,just what is, what exist. whether religion is real or merely a human construct, it is the bases of human understanding of right or wrong. The moral supperiority that both the left and right lay claim to comes from the the judeo-christian foundations.
1
@bryan mcdonald All men were created equal. In the US we are supposed to live by that law.
@bryan mcdonald: Yes it is wrong to discriminate, not because the natural sciences imply it, but because our human society has decided by a political process to forbid it. Of course we are animals, but unlike rats or wolves we have language (they may have a little in some forms) and political discourse and laws. We are animals, but not "mere" animals, and we hold it to be self-evident that all men are created equal, even if many of us don't believe that "created" is accurate. There is no right or wrong in chemical reactions, but there are right and wrong among humans.
1
May I advocate that a program we use in Tucson, Arizona be brought to St. Louis in order to help facilities like Friendship Village learn how to offer compassionate, respectful care to LGBT elders. The program is called Project Visibility and was created in Boulder, Colorado by a senior agency there. In Tucson, this program is run by the Pima Council on Aging, a local senior agency group. I am a volunteer trainer for this program. I speak to assisted living centers, nursing homes and other places where LGBT elders might find themselves as they are aging and need a new residential setting. Friendship Village and other facilities like it must not discriminate against our LGBT elders for that is a horrific thing to do to people. Our LGBT elders have lived a life full of discrimination and bias. Now as they enter their final decades of life, are we going to continue to do this to them? I, for one, as a heterosexual woman, say no. As an ally, I say I should not receive unearned privileges over my LGBT peers. We all deserve housing policies that are not discriminatory. I hope some organization in St. Louis could bring Project Visibility to your town and start offering trainings to facilities on how to treat LGBT elders with respect, sensitivity, and dignity.
261
@Denise Rose
“...how to treat LGBT elders [and everyone] with respect, sensitivity, and dignity.”
Shouldn’t real Christians have learned this a long time ago?
8
@Denise Rose
Great work, thank you!!
R-E-S-P-E-C-T
1
Once again, we witness another shameful use of religious precept and an example of how religion fails to grow and evolve with an evolving universe. This CCRC's management has a long journey to achieve enlightenment.
Friendship Village indeed.
144
@EmergencePerhaps. But what about the right to be ignorant?
A friendship potemkin, more like.
1
I worked in subsidized senior housing in the 90’s for 5 years. We had problems with gossip and meanness. A man moved in with AIDS and with some education the tenants were kind to him.
I live on a street with several gay couples. No one cares, even the more traditional ones say they are great neighbors. I would be fine with this couple as my neighbors.
I think a lot of the problem is that now we emphasize people differences like their skin color, ethic background etc. I was brought up to like people for who they are. I don’t care about skin color or sexual orientation if they are a decent human being, what else matters?
I have worked in mental health for years and I find it’s ok and ,that includes staff, to make fun of and call people who are marginalized in this system “crazy.” The conditions they often live in are horrific no matter their ethnicity. There is no white privilege or any other kind. They are people with no voice. It’s still seems like it’s ok to treat them badly.
If you want to find someone to hate you will. I wish this couple the best but would not move into this place because the outcome will be awful. Don’t spend your older years on a lawsuit but find a place where people are caring and won’t treat you with hatred.
25
As far as the LGBTQ community has come in recent years, religion still trumps as the Masterpiece Cakeshop case makes clear. And it is only going to get worse as courts make discrimination against LGBTQ a constitutional right.
34
@kjbNo court has made it a right and the federal courts will not. There is, however, a balancing between public and private and also freedom of conscience and religion.
The baker case is a good example. If a gay couple came in and ordered a cake from the shelf and was refused, and local law forbade discrimination based on being gay, that is one thing.
Preparing a special cake for a gay marriage is another.
Friendship Village seems to need some really basic lessons in "friendship."
309
@Allen Drachir: To me the name "Friendship Village" is itself a BIG tip-off to the likelihood of discrimination. It's PRECISELY the kind of fake-nice name a place that is NOT accepting of everyone would have.
A place that actually IS friendly to everyone would not have that in their name; they'd have some neutral name like "Lakeside Village" or "Meadow Acres."
Seniors, beware of religious underpinnings when you are considering CCRC's! There ought to be a "truth in advertising" law that would require any CCRC to state plainly if it has any religious or political affiliation.
21
"To me the name "Friendship Village" is itself a BIG tip-off to the likelihood of discrimination. "
So true. It is kind of like when a country has the word "democratic" or "peoples republic" in its name. Usually it is no such thing.
3
@Barry Short
Careful though - don't confuse them with "Friends" - that's another word for Quakers, and Quakers definitely don't discriminate.
I had wondered if they called themselves "Friendship" actually hoping some might confuse them with "Friends," who have a good reputation pretty much everywhere.
"Friendship" isn't "Friends."
3
“But in a statement, the vice president of its board of directors said that “guided by our Christian faith,” it led “a loving community that wishes only the very best for all people, including Ms. Walsh and Ms. Nance.””
No, that's a blatant discriminatory lie! If you really wished the best for them, you'd have kept your promise and let them into the community!
Simple principle: If you offer a commercial service to the public, you cannot discriminate against people, no matter what your faith is.
What was left unstated in the article was whether they would have been permitted to join if they had simply been friends or unmarried lesbians...
353
@Stephanie Bradley
If Ms Walsh and Ms Nance had been black,they would have been told that they would probably be happier with "their own people."
23
@Stephanie Bradley
Friendship Village's cohabitation policy limits shared units to family members -- including spouses. So no -- they would not have been permitted to join as friends or as an unmarried couple.
1
@Stephanie Bradley
Yes. That the hateful bigot refused to use titles of respect that acknowledged their legal marriage says everything.
1
Oxymoron: "Friendship Village." It takes a village to raise discrimination. Buyer Agreements based on a flawed fictional superstitious "bible"? The sooner all org. religion ends up in the dustbin of history, the better. All you need is faith in your own spirituality.
37
@Michael W. Espy--Organized religion will never go away--nor should it. The problem is with certain "sects" or what have you which believe it's okay to discriminate. These two ladies also viewed a Lutheran (organized religion) retirement home who stated they had no problem with same-sex marriage/relationships.
You may not like "organized religion" but it's unfair to paint it all the same color--and equally unfair to think you can ban it.
13
@Norton I don't think Mr. Espy personally wants to ban organized religion. But I hope we as a species mature and evolve to be able to deal with life without fairy tales. I particularly look forward to a time when people don't try to enforce their delusions on vulnerable children or on rational people.
1
@Norton Organized religion is not religion, it is a club.
1
It's a dilemma. The non-heterosexual community has high expectations in that it expects most Americans to bend over backwards to accord them total, unequivocal acceptance. But the problem is that many agree with this continuing care retirement community's definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Perhaps there is 5 or 10 percent of the population which is non heterosexual. It's ok with me but I know lots of people who find them objectionable. Should they just find a place that is more welcoming?
5
@R. Anderson Perhaps there is no other place in their community. Perhaps that is the only one. And so....where are they to go? Discrimination is just that - discrimination. Should a black person go to a place that is more accommodation to black people? Or Hispanics do the same? NO, this is not right in any circumstance.
42
@R. Anderson Finding someone who is different from you to be "objectionable" is essentially the definition of discrimination. It's ethically unacceptable, and one hopes also illegal.
40
@R. Anderson how is it “bending over backwards” to simply allow people to go about their lives?
Two people who love each other and choose to marry do not harm the rest of society by doing so. They aren’t expecting special treatment. They’re expecting to be treated the same as everyone else - like a fellow human being. Why do you call that “bending over backwards”? Are kindness and compassion so difficult?
54
Thank you for raising awareness to this largely hidden problem in long-term care homes in many communities across the country.
Related to it is the reference to Marsha Wentzel who reportedly suffered harassment, discrimination, and violence at the hands of other residents (such as calling her "fucking dyke," fucking faggot," and "homosexual bitch") and the ignorant and appalling response of the administration of her senior housing community (their retaliation after Marsha's complaints seem to have only make things worse for Marsha).
There are at least 30 research articles published in journals about the prevalent, concerning but grossly under-recognized phenomenon of resident-to-resident incidents (also called resident-to-resident aggression, resident-to-resident abuse, resident-to-resident violence, and resident-to-resident elder mistreatment) but I have yet to see a single research study focusing exclusively on elders who are LGBT who are verbally, physically, and sexually targeted by other residents in long-term care homes.
This is one of the most underrecognized problems in long-term care homes. With the aging of the Baby Boomers, the problem is anticipated to grow in the coming years.
People who are LGBT have the same human right to live in a "safe care environment" and to enjoy the "highest practical emotional, psychological, and social well-being."
It is very encouraging to see that Marsha is pursuing a lawsuit to (hopefully) realize her human right.
68
This reminds me of an early report on how aggressive those elderly residents, often women, were to each other. Often it is hard to prove a specific intent. Aggressive people don't change much.
1
"a loving community"
These sorry excuses for Christian believers could at least stop spewing vile falsehoods. Isn't there something non-Trumpian, like a Biblical commandment that addresses such blatant lies? Shame on Friendship Village and its narrow-minded administrators. May these fundamentalists some day find themselves dependent on someone LGBT for their daily needs, shelter, food or healthcare, and let the hear the words of Jesus echo through the millenia:
“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.”
117
My wife and I live in a similar CCRC retirement community in a supposedly ultra-conservative eastern suburban area. This community has no problem with accepting same sex couples. We, in fact, have close neighbors who are not only a same-sex couple, but one white and one African-American. This Friendship Village place needs to move forward.
246
Another form of discrimination common in upscale senior independent living communities is aimed at those with noticeable disabilities, such the need to use a cane, a walker, a wheelchair or a white cane. Usually the marketing department sets the standard, bearing in mind that new prospects like to see nothing but active, friendly, able-bodied adults. Discrimination based on sexual identity could also emanate from the marketing department, which is concerned about catering to the largest possible pool of prospective residents, most of whom are presumed to feel most comfortable with the Biblical definition of marriage.
30
@William: In my experience, as a long term resident in one of these CCRC communities, many residents use canes, walkers or even battery powered wagons to get about. The facilites and grounds are designed to accomodate that. The marketing department does, however, prefer that residents still be able to live in the independent housing units at the time of entry. Some people wait too long before applying, and then are turned down because one member of a couple requires housing separately in the dementia unit or in a seperate personal care facility. Those things are available, but intended for later. The point: do not wait until that happens before making the decision to apply for and gain entrance. Life is good there. Enjoy as many years there as you can while you still are able to enjoy it. It is like being back on campus during your college years!
8
@Penseur I agree that such facilities are "like being back on campus during your college years."
I did dorm life in the 1960s and do not wish to repeat it, especially since "graduating" has quite different connotations at my ever-advancing age!
4
@William
I totally agree that residents with visible decline don't present the image the marketing dept wants and are also shunned by other residents. My parents lived in an upscale CCRC for 15 years. Though they remained mentally sharp their apartment was a long walk to the dining room, so when their mobility declined they hired caregivers to help transport them and help them stay together in their apartment. Once they began appearing in the dining room in wheelchairs, they were shunned. Moving to Assisted Living wasn't a solution because my dad had poor eyesight and high risk of a fall without 1:1 assistance. The family wished they had never moved into the CCRC and had stayed in their home with caregivers coming in. Quite often
19
I've wondered this, where do you find an affordable continuing care community which is ok with LGBTQ people and a diversity of religious belief?
6
@H: You would find them in suburban Greater Philadelphia as regards sexual orientation and diversity of religious belief. Affordable might be another matter. That can mean different things to different people.
6
@H Communities established through the Society of Friends (Quakers) generally welcome diverse populations and beliefs. Also Methodist & UCC, at least in the DC area. Affordability is probably tied to location.
14
@H you can find them via http://sageusa.care/. These facilities have been trained in LGBT cultural competency for both LGBT residents and/or residents who have family who identify as LGBT. It's just a shame that there aren't more of them!
5
You can pass all the laws you want, but you can't force people to accept something they find abhorrent. I would be uncomfortable living near these two women. This is a Christian community. It has rules and has a right to live its faith. These women shouldn't have applied knowing the rules in the first place.
7
@Josette DuPres — what exactly would make you feel uncomfortable about living near these women? Would you feel uncomfortable about it, if you didn’t know they were married? In what specific ways does their relationship have a direct affect on you or your life, or your faith and the way you practice it.
It seems clear that they absolutely did not know about the “rules in the first place.” Where are you getting the idea that they did?
Discrimination is wrong. What’s especially “abhorrent” is justifying it with our faith traditions. We have learned this lesson multiple times throughout our history as a nation. How many more times do we need to learn the same thing?
87
@Josette DuPres
The application said "spouses." By law, they are spouses. And we live under the rule of law.
27
@Josette DuPres What do you mean? What rules? About the type of relationship? They are legally married.
22
Paula, You tell us that Mary and Beverly want to live there anyway and are obviously motivated enough to sue. But I'm curious why when they have choices that might be more welcoming. Did they elaborate?
10
As shown in the article - no one actually living there or working there cared about their status. It was only when the paperwork went to some Christian fanatic administrator that there was a problem.
48
@jane gross As the column makes clear the "choices" lgbtq have are limited and in many areas non-existant.
1
I'd welcome neighbors, gay or straight, as long as they are peaceful. At the same time, I respect people with genuine religious convictions although I am agonostic.
Perhaps there could be something like a zoning requirement in the spirit of a compromise. A county or city must have a number of all-inclusive retirement communities in proportion to the total number of facilities. Live and let live.