Posted on 05/25/2018 3:37:51 PM PDT by Ennis85
U.S. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher told a group of Realtors last week that homeowners should be able to refuse to sell their property to gays and lesbians, a statement that cost him the support of a key national Realtor group.
“Every homeowner should be able to make a decision not to sell their home to someone (if) they don’t agree with their lifestyle,” Rohrabacher told an Orange County Association of Realtors delegation at a May 16 meeting in Washington, D.C., according to Wayne Woodyard, a former Orange County Realtor president who was at the event.
On Thursday, Rohrabacher confirmed the accuracy of the sentiment, and added that homeowners should have the right to “choose who they do business with.”
“We’ve drawn a line on racism, but I don’t think we should extend that line,” Rohrabacher said.
“A homeowner should not be required to be in business with someone they think is doing something that is immoral.”
The statement ignited a protest by a Realtor gay-rights group, prompting the National Association of Realtors to withdraw its recommendation that members send campaign contributions to Rohrabacher.
“It was determined that Rep. Rohrabacher will no longer receive support from NAR’s President’s Circle,” an association statement said, referring to its list of recommended candidates. Rohrabacher’s stance, the 1.3-million-member trade group said, is contrary to NAR’s code of ethics, which bans discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation or gender identity.”
“We certainly hope that Congress will … support the elimination of housing discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.”
The about-face occurred as the 15-term coastal Orange County Republican is locked in his toughest re-election campaign.
He’s facing 15 challengers, including eight Democrats as well as onetime political ally Scott Baugh, former Orange County GOP chairman.
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
Well honestly, aren’t there some fairly extreme pieces of weirdness in that story?
2006-2007 home prices were at a peaky-peak secular high and the market was clearly running out of buyers. (easy to say in hindsight) With the “fog-a-mirror” financing that was in place at the time, a non-selling home is priced way high. That is largely true today, in fact, *any* time.
A realtor selling a home should take no more than 30 days, otherwise he/she is not in touch with the market.
That your former neighbor hates you because some blacks moved in is kind of tough luck.
In my view, all of those issues are the fault of your first realtor. The gist of the article in terms of what Rohrabacher is saying is that you should be able to choose “whom you do business with”. I don’t consider selling a house to be “doing business”, but that is quite arguable. A realtor is supposed to insulate you from most of that. But in terms of anti-discrimination laws in 50 out of 50 states, what your first realtor did was flamingly illegal, and unprofessional in terms of actively marketing your house at a marketable price.
“Business which don’t follow the law, don’t stay in business very long.
Yes ... services and/or mixed part-service part-product sales, but not pre-made off-the-shelf products.
I also think some standard services can’t be denied. For example, a tow truck driver can’t leave someone on the side of the road because he’s seen kissing his boyfriend when the truck arrives.
So my line would be services that would somehow force the seller into an implied endorcement of a lifestyle choice - which would include a religion or a sexual preference or gender identity (no, they’re not “born that way”), such as a wedding cake maker or wedding photographer,
Idiot.
I’m not making an argument based on law, I said it is a seller’s RIGHT to discriminate based on any criteria they wish. Not that it isn’t unlawful.
Then do a “for sale by owner” and stipulate in the ad “no blacks”, “no Asians”, or “no gays” or “no single moms”. Seriously dont waste the time of people by advertising a home for sale when you only want to sell it to white people only.
No real estate company is going to risk their business for some crank’s demographic demands either. That is why they pulled any support for this candidate.
Federal: https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/FHLaws
State of Cal: https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/housing/
Geezers, Dama ....lie guess you aren’t interested in being in congress any longer
That is correct if they have an attorney who will help them. Any one can file a law suit if the judge accepts the case. Many RE cases are small claims court and there are no attorneys.
Some buyers are a pain in the Azz. Like lawyers. Sell to them at your own risk. Queer lawyers are even worse. You aren’t required to state your reasons for turning down an offer. Just keep you logic to yourself.
non discrimination has been the law since the late 60s including in Cal. Dana is way off base here and should know better.
be careful, after you turndown a few, you may establish a pattern. Offers should remain in the realtors file for 5 years and the people making offers probably have a copy.
The original wording of the Declaration stated “Life,liberty and PROPERTY”. This BS inalienable right of “happiness” is partly to blame on our country going into the toilet.
“Why should a person care about whom they sell their house to?”
Because often your neighbors are your friends and their kids are your kid’s friends...
Critizing gaydom is the third rail of politics.
Imagine that, some people don’t approve of disease-ridden sodomites living next door to same sex kids. Male queers are all potential same sex offenders of the worst brand.
witness, patterns, refusing a higher offer. Cases have been won before. The feds have sent black couples in to buy and made cases. They can do the same with gays.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.