Posted by:
bigbadger
(
)
Date: January 29, 2015 10:19PM
Suppose a gay couple wishes to rent an apartment. According to Oaks and Holland and company, members of the LGBT community should not be discriminated against when it comes to housing. So considering in isolation the LDS Church's statement in support of fair housing rights for LGBT individuals, the gay couple should be able to rent the apartment.
But seldom are things so simple as to be considered in isolation and in theory only.
Now add this fact to the mix. The owner of the apartment building is a Mormon who is opposed to renting apartments to gays on religious grounds. The Mormon owner feels that gay relationships are morally wrong. And the owner's opposition is based on the teachings of the Mormon Church.
According to Oaks and Holland, the rights of the Mormon apartment owner need to be respected. And although Oaks and Holland did not address this scenario, I think they were suggesting that the owner's religious rights should trump the gay couple's fair housing rights.
This is the question that Oaks and or Holland should have been asked: What should happen when these two rights collide?