Quote:
Originally Posted by dekeguy
I share Tom Earp's concerns regarding government intrusion into privacy issues. I also share the concerns of those who are a bit offended by some of the comments made among the membership in social media exchanges. I am also troubled by the thoughts that state law prohibits this sort of discrimination and that should decide the issue.
Seems to me that this is a freedom of association issue which was decided by the US Supreme Court a few years back in the City of New Orleans v. Certain Carnival Organizations where the court slam dunked the city in its attempt to force open the membership of Carnival Organizations which were seen to be discriminating in their membership selection. The Court ruled that freedom of association was a constitutional issue and its ruling trumped all inferior courts' rulings, state laws, and city ordinances. In short, one has the right to choose who one wants to hang with.
From my point of view if a guy rushes, the chapter likes him, and he is a good fit then what is the problem? Likewise, if he is not liked and is not seen as a good fit then again, what is the problem? Bid him or don't bid him. It is the chapters business and it is private family business.
|
Do you have a citation? Googling the case name isn't turning anything up.
That sounds like a trade association. I also imagine the sort of discrimination wasn't racial/sexual/gender/national origin/religion, etc.
The offending group in this case wouldn't be in trouble at all except here's one of the rare cases where sexual orientation discrimination can actually be proved.