View Single Post
Old 07-18-2011, 03:35 PM   #14
saden1
MVP
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 46
Posts: 10,069
Re: S.F. weighs protecting ex-cons seeking homes, jobs

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
You have paid your debt to society when you complete your sentence, you owe nothing more to society as a whole. As an individual, however, I am free to judge you based on past conduct. I wouldn't rent to someone who credit report shows that they are constantly late on payments even if they are not currently in debt (i.e - you've paid your debt in the most literal sense).

Just b/c your not currently in jail doesn't mean your past choices won't affect how you use my property in the future. Sorry, incentivize all you want to, assist people honestly trying to rehabilitate themselves - provide tax breaks to people who rent to them, etc. - or create government housing, but don't force me to risk my economic prospects on someone who has exhibited criminal behavior in the past. Again, on a more basic level, and to me, it is just wrong to extend constitutionally "protected class" status to something that is not an immutable characteristic or an exercise of 1st amendment rights (i.e. religion).
The moral hazard in your argument is that even though they have paid their debt you should be free to discriminate against them and inevitably will. This hidden cost is not beneficial to society or the individual being discriminated against. The world is not limited to just your freedom and exercise of and the question is how do you find balance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Explain to me how a disabled person is the same as a former convict. I see some very distinct differences (one acted in a criminal manner, the other did not neccessarily do so).
Suppose I don't want to go through the trouble of building accessible entry/stairways/bathrooms and don't want to rent to disabled people and don't want to hire a disabled person due to medical care costs? Well, you can't. The law says you can not discriminate against disabled people AND you must provide them with accessible amenities. If such law can exist on the books then so can these laws proposed in San Fran. There is precedence and the claim of financial harm or the potential of is immaterial.
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."

-Jenkins
saden1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.37677 seconds with 10 queries