Posted on 03/29/2007 1:36:10 PM PDT by Jet Jaguar
(Sumter) - A gay couple looking to rent a hotel room say they were turned away because of their sexuality.
"She wasn't discreet about it," said Jason Pickel, referring to a hotel employee. "She was not apologetic. She just said, 'We do not rent to gay people.'"
For the past two and a half years, Pickel and Darren Black Bear have been in a committed relationship. During a search for a temporary home, the couple says it went to Affordable Suites of America, a long-term stay hotel located on Gion Street in Sumter.
"We were inquiring about the price, deposits, extra person fee, and she asked who the room was going to be for, and I said for my partner and I,” Pickel said. “She said, 'Oh we don't rent to multiple people of the same sex.' I said, so you don't rent to gay couples? She said, 'No, we don't rent to gay people at all.'"
The website for Affordable Suites of America states the company does not allow children or pets in its suites, but there is no mention of same sex couples.
News19 contacted the hotel, posing as a potential renter, and inquired about two men staying in the same room. The receptionist who answered the phone told us the following: “Our policy is we don’t rent to two people of the same sex if we only have one bed.” “Is that your policy,” we asked. “That’s corporate policy because they only have one sleeping area.” We then asked, “Okay, but they can't share the bed?” "I suppose they could, but most men don’t want to," she said.
However, when News19 called the owner of the hotel, Carroll Atkisson, he says there had been some confusion. He says any couple can come to the place and they will rent to them, period. Atkisson says the policy was not mean to target homosexuals. He says they were just trying to stop two single people from being in the same bed.
Pickel and Black Bear say they still plan to seek legal action. "Everyone is floored, shocked and outraged," said Pickel. "We have contacted some of our friends who are activists."
Currently, there is no state law preventing a hotel from refusing service to a same-sex couple. However, it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, gender, disability, or marital status.
"If they have a policy, it has to be maintained fair and equitably," says Tom Sponseller, President of the Hospitality Association of South Carolina. "At the beach, for example, because there are different bike weekends at the beach, that policy has to be enforced, and consistent."
There is currently a bill in the State Senate that addresses this issue. The measure, proposed by Charleston Democrat Robert Ford, would expand the Lodging Establishment Act to include prohibition of discrimination because of sexual orientation or gender identity.
With some dude, probably very hairy, named Black Bear, maybe they should'a called PETA!
Most Excellent! Also the most logical post I have seen in a long time! Maybe you should hold inservices for Judges!
Maybe they didn't want you sh**t on the sheets.......
"Your rectum or mouth is not made for sexual intercourse"
Indeed they are not and whilst I have no desire to use anyone's rectum for sexual intercourse I think that oral sex is a thoroughly enjoyable sexual practice, you might be more uptight about such issues and that's fine, that's up to you, but please don't feel the need to judge the rest of us more rational people on the basis of your own particular hang-ups.
Jason Pickel and Darren Black Bear
What does that mean, objectively?
What would Islam do?
I completely agree with you, but I think it's about 50 years too late. I wish that the entire Civil Rights movement had been economic, not by legislation. The Montgomery Bus Boycott was I thought, perfect. Make it COST you money to be a racist, but don't legislate it. I think if someone wanted to open a blacks-only motel, or gay-only, or no-Irish, or smoking allowed, or whatever, they should be legally able to so without the government harassing them.
Anybody have any idea what this sentence was supposed to mean?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One can only guess from the wording, as an official grouchy old man I become ever more grouchy with people who either don't know how or cannot be bothered to communicate rather than simply throw random words together. If this is what passes for reporting how is anybody supposed to take the story seriously?
People seem to forget that.
Then stop being gay, problems solved.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Property rights should come above all others.
This is not your grandfather's America. Now we see the pernicious effect of using the federal government to enforce attitude control, as embodied in what was misnamed a "civil rights act." As someone once said, it was 10% civil rights, and 90% federal control, which was the point all along.
No, you cannot do with your property as you please, if you open any part of it to the public, it ain't yours any more. (Although you still get the bills for maintaining it!)
I remember one time hearing of a little old lady who had a detached garage with an upstairs apartment. All self-contained, perfect for a single person. She, being a widow, then innocently advertised it for rent to a "single, Christian, older man with (iirc) handyman experience." She just wanted some old geezer who could use a hammer in case something broke. Very understandable.
And then came the letter, threatening a lawsuit on the grounds of housing discrimination, because she had specified "Christian" in the ad. (Actually, any of the specifications in the ad would have worked for this purpose.) Upon payment of some amount which I disremember, maybe close to but not exceeding $1000, and withdrawal of the ad, the correspondents would "promise" to drop the action. What to do? She paid up.
Turned out that these people supported themselves by trolling the ads for just such gems, knowing that their position was unassailable, and that if necessary, they COULD make good on the threat. The anti-discrimination fine would be enough to force the victim to sell out completely.
Since that time, the same thing has happened in other places, but, naturally, it's not important enough to rate a square inch of newsprint.
Land of the free, indeed.
Did they have "gay" written on their forehead?
OVERHAULING OF STRIGHT AMERICA
Maybe Pickel carried in his gerbil cage when he went to the desk to get the room.
I wouldn't have rented to them, either. Fruitcakes.
Would that be an, Native Indian, West Indian or East Indian?
Well, you know what happens when you ass-u-me.
You might want to exam your preposition since someone who simply points out a medical fact is now a accused of being uptight, judgmental and an irrational prude.
Personally, the marriage bed between a man and women is made for pleasure whatever form that might take.
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.