Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Post Reply
lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by lundbaek »

As I recall, about a couple of years back a piece of legislation was passed in Utah that made it illegal for rental property owners to deny residence to prospective renters on the basis of their homosexual preferences, and also made it illegal for business owners to refuse to hire such people for that reason. In a talk in Arizona last Saturday evening during a freedom of religion conference Elder Oaks reminded us that the Church supported that legislation, which some of us who heard about it consider an infringement on the "right and control of property" (D&C 134:2).

Does anyone have any details about that legislation? I think it applies to only a relatively small area in or around Salt Lake City.

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by Lizzy60 »

This article may help. It is a state-wide law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 61237c0993" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
David13
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7072
Location: Utah

Re: Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by David13 »

It is an apparent violation of control of property, no question about it. But this is the world we live in, where it's more important for someone else to tell us what we can or can't do, including religion, because of their idea of "fair" or whatever.
There is also federal law with regard to both employment and housing.
Which may or may not apply.
There are of course, other bases upon which to deny or give preference, such as religion, in Utah, perhaps, at least.
And in employment, you have discretion to determine who is the 'best qualified'.
Credit report, past history, etc. all good basis for denial.
dc

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by lundbaek »

After reading the article to which Lizzy gave us the link https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 61237c0993 I guess we LDSs have to accept that the Church leadership reserves the right to promote a violation of the God-given and unalienable "right and control of property".

Ezra
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4357
Location: Not telling

Re: Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by Ezra »

lundbaek wrote:After reading the article to which Lizzy gave us the link https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 61237c0993 I guess we LDSs have to accept that the Church leadership reserves the right to promote a violation of the God-given and unalienable "right and control of property".

At least the church PR group does.

Every legilation passed that restricts our god given freedoms has been done under the guise of kindness or equality.

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by Lizzy60 »

Ezra wrote:
lundbaek wrote:After reading the article to which Lizzy gave us the link https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 61237c0993 I guess we LDSs have to accept that the Church leadership reserves the right to promote a violation of the God-given and unalienable "right and control of property".

At least the church PR group does.

Every legilation passed that restricts our god given freedoms has been done under the guise of kindness or equality.
The bill was promoted by more than just the church PR group. It was endorsed by two Apostles at a press conference.
From the article:


"Twenty-one states and the District have passed similar anti-discrimination legislation to protect gay and lesbian people when it comes to housing and employment. Eighteen states and the District have protections for gender identity. But Utah’s proposed legislation gained national attention last week when the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has been preaching acceptance over the years on same-sex attraction, sent two apostles, the church’s top spiritual leaders, to a news conference to publicly endorse the bill."

Here is an account of the press conference from LDS.org.

https://www.lds.org/church/news/church- ... m?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ezra
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4357
Location: Not telling

Re: Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by Ezra »

Lizzy60 wrote:
Ezra wrote:
lundbaek wrote:After reading the article to which Lizzy gave us the link https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... 61237c0993 I guess we LDSs have to accept that the Church leadership reserves the right to promote a violation of the God-given and unalienable "right and control of property".

At least the church PR group does.

Every legilation passed that restricts our god given freedoms has been done under the guise of kindness or equality.
The bill was promoted by more than just the church PR group. It was endorsed by two Apostles at a press conference.
From the article:


"Twenty-one states and the District have passed similar anti-discrimination legislation to protect gay and lesbian people when it comes to housing and employment. Eighteen states and the District have protections for gender identity. But Utah’s proposed legislation gained national attention last week when the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which has been preaching acceptance over the years on same-sex attraction, sent two apostles, the church’s top spiritual leaders, to a news conference to publicly endorse the bill."

Here is an account of the press conference from LDS.org.

https://www.lds.org/church/news/church- ... m?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I guessed oaks before I even read it. I wonder why? I wonder what that means?

lundbaek
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11123
Location: Mesa, Arizona

Re: Apparent Violation of Control of Property.

Post by lundbaek »

No government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual....the right and control of property,...." Well, our federal government is certainly not existing in peace at this time, not has it been for many decades.

I wouldn't feel so badly about this if the Church leadership would acknowledge its deliberate support of this violation of "the right and control of property", which, if I understand correctly, is a tenet of the LDS faith. The "fairness" reason doesn't cut it with me because I see it as unfair to property and business owners.

Post Reply