University creates "no whites" zones

robfosters said:
Ok got you, so as i thought, it’s perfectly acceptable to stop anyone entering your private residence, even if your decisions are based purely on race?
Click to expand...

My understanding is if you own the property yes.
If you rent yes, however the landlord couldn't.
 
Isn't the landlord thing a bit of a grey area what with it being a privately run student residency and not open to the public?

e: Also: robfosters, yes. But again whether you, i, or anyone else consider your reasons from doing so are valid defines if someone would consider it to be racist. (Hopefully the state would never go as far as to get involved)
 
robfosters said:
If this is accepted because it’s private property, does that mean me and my family are vindicated for not allowing blacks in our house?
Click to expand...
Being privately owned in this instance is a bit of a misnomer, as the residence is over 4 units you can't discriminate based on race.
 
C Kent said:
Fair housing act of 1968 which extended the basic discrimination protections within the 1964 Civil Rights Act into the housing market. It explicitly prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, colour, national origin, religion, sex.

Race Discrimination and the Fair Housing Act
Congress enacted the Fair Housing Act (FHA) in order to promote equal access to housing opportunities. The Fair Housing Act (along with its amendments) states that property owners, financial institutions, and landlords may not discriminate on the basis of race and national origin (the Act also prohibits discrimination based on sex, religion, family status, disability, and more).

Specifically, property owners, financial institutions, and landlords may not take the following action (or inaction) based on race of the actual or potential buyer, tenant, or applicant:

  • Refusing to rent or sell housing;
  • Refusing to negotiate for housing;
  • Making housing unavailable;
  • Providing different terms to different people;
  • Setting different conditions or privileges for sale or rental of a property;
  • Denying access to or membership in a facility or service related to the sale or rental of housing;
  • Imposing different rates and terms on a loan;
  • Refusing to make a mortgage loan; and
  • Discriminating in appraising property.
Almost all forms of housing are covered by the Fair Housing Act. There are, however, several exceptions to these prohibitions. Generally, owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members do not have to comply with the Act.
Click to expand...
 
@C Kent So based on a really shonky understanding of the law, gotcha'
C Kent said:
If he's had bad experiences with some black people he's not a racist apparently
Click to expand...
I'm starting to suspect you're ignoring all the context on purpose in order to support some preconceived belief that you have, You know all the context of whether the reason is valid, whether the reason is based on actual reason, whether your reason for doing so is actually a good reason or not.
Dis86 said:
Nope.Murphy has declared if you've had a bad experience with someone of a particular category then its not -ist to discriminate against them.
Click to expand...
Again with the passive aggressive referring to people in the third person!

While it may make you feel good to misrepresent what someone said it actually just makes you come across as rather silly, and grasping at straws. I did not say "if you've had a bad experience with someone of a particular category then its not -ist to discriminate against them", i said if you have a valid reason to discriminate then it's not and whether it's a valid reason depends on who's making that judgment. (i know some people struggle when it comes to reading comprehension but come on, this isn't an English class and i really don't want to spend the day trying to teach people what words like "reason", "valid, "you", "us" and all the other words i had to direct people towards dictionaries for yesterday).
robfosters said:
Which is exactly the case with my parents
Click to expand...
That really depends on whether they, you, i, or anyone else thinks not allowing black people into your house based on what i assume is one or more bad experiences despite there being something like 1.8m black people in England is a valid reason. Personally I'd say it's not because it's simply not reasonable to assume that a bad experience with one or more people is indicative of the group.
 
Murphy's definition of a racist.

Person A. Has bad experiences with a few people of a particular race, doesn't like that ethnicity. Isn't a racist because you agree with their politics
Person B. Has bad experiences with a few people of a particular race, doesn't like that ethnicity. Is a racist because you don't agree with their politics.

Spoiler they are both racist.
 
This is worse than people being afraid of spiders.

You are acting like white people are angels and do no wrong. Have never robbed, raped, assaulted or commited any other crimes. Happy to let white people in your house despite the Krays, Jimmy Savile, Gary Glitter etc...
 
Murphy said:
@C Kent So based on a really shonky understanding of the law, gotcha'

That really depends on whether they, you, i, or anyone else thinks not allowing black people into your house based on what i assume is one or more bad experiences despite there being something like 1.8m black people in England. Personally I'd say that's not a valid reason because it's simply not reasonable to assume that a bad experience with one or more people is indicative of the group.
Click to expand...
That’s easy to say when you haven’t been left with mental scars after a brutal assault
 
Tony Edwards said:
This is worse than people being afraid of spiders.

You are acting like white people are angels and do no wrong. Have never robbed, raped, assaulted or commited any other crimes. Happy to let white people in your house despite the Krays, Jimmy Savile, Gary Glitter etc...
Click to expand...

I dunno, I reckon the Krays would be a hoot and a half. We could play a game of Guess Who whilst drinking chocolate milk through those candy straws.
 
C Kent said:
Murphy's definition of a racist.

Person A. Has bad experiences with a few people of a particular race, doesn't like that ethnicity. Isn't a racist because you agree with their politics
Person B. Has bad experiences with a few people of a particular race, doesn't like that ethnicity. Is a racist because you don't agree with their politics.

Spoiler they are both racist.
Click to expand...
Wow, so many cowards in GD today who just can't bring themselves to address someone directly so resort to passive aggressive behaviour.

No that's not my definition, if you think it is then you're reading comprehension skills are worse then even i thought.
robfosters said:
That’s easy to say when you haven’t been left with mental scars after a brutal assault
Click to expand...
Yes it's easy to say because it's the truth. Like i said in a previous post...
Murphy said:
Not a hypocrite, it's not as black & white (no pun intended) as some people like to think it is. I agree that separating victims of abuse from the world (by that races, sexes, or any other victim) is not the answer. However sometimes it's a necessity because you need to create an environment where the person feels safe so they can start to concentrate on something other than the fear they're probably so used feeling. Ideally you'd remove the person from whatever their perceived threat is and start working with them to undo what's essentially an *irrational fear.

*Like others have said just because you been a victim of abuse, no matter how many times from whatever demographic, it's not rational to think everyone from that demographic is going to abuse you. However that's not how our monkey brain works, our initial reaction to situations is often emotional however when that emotional reaction, like fear, causes problems in our everyday life like it does for women in refuges and i assume these people that want to avoid white, or even black, people then they need to learn how to recognise those emotions and 'overrule' them with the logical part of their brain.
Click to expand...
While they maybe left with mental scars after a brutal assault the reasoning part of their brains should be capable of recognising what would understandably be an emotional reaction to seeing someone that reminds them of that attack. The reasoning part of their brain should be capable of recognising that emotional reaction and reminding them that not everyone is like whoever attacked them.

They're not the first people to be left with emotional scars and they won't be the last.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom