News Clips | Ohio | Video

Gay Family Denied Entry to Public Pool in Ohio: VIDEO

Melody Mohn

The Heise Park Pool in Galion, Ohio is a popular destination for residents during the summertime and offers a discounted pass for families. Melody Mohn and her wife applied for a Family Pass so that they could take their three children swimming, but were denied and told that the city ordinance defines a family as a mother, a father, and up to three children.

Normally this is where the story would bring up a lawsuit being filed, possible involvement by the ACLU, and a divided community. Instead, Mohn started an online petition, wrote to the mayor, and brought up the issue at a city council meeting to discuss a change in the wording of the ordinance. Mohn's pleas did not fall on deaf ears, and while it doesn't seem likely that change will happen in time for this summer, City Council Member Sarah Capretta said:

They want to make sure that they word [the ordinance] properly so that it can include more people in the city of Galion. We have a lot of grandparents taking care of grandchildren, aunts and uncles taking care of nephews and nieces and we want to make sure that we include all of those people to make everybody eligible to be able to use the facility because that is what it is there for.

You can watch the WBNS-10TV report AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. I'd bet that the other family structures mentioned by the councilwoman are issued family passes on a regular basis.

    Posted by: Sammy | Jul 12, 2014 4:00:17 PM


  2. I'd bet that the other family structures mentioned by the councilwoman are issued family passes on a regular basis.

    Posted by: Sammy | Jul 12, 2014 4:00:17 PM


  3. I assume the headline is just the usual towleroad hysteria to drum up clicks, and that they were denied the family discount, not entry to the pool. Both are wrong of course, but not letting gays in a pool is reminiscent of the darkest days of civil rights history when pools were "whites only".

    Posted by: Brian1 | Jul 12, 2014 4:06:27 PM


  4. I'm glad to see that they didn't opt for the ACLU/lawsuit route. Don't get me wrong, I love the ACLU and have been a member for 20 years. I just think that they are an option that should be exercised when no other satisfaction can be made. I think people are becoming more reasonable and we, as a community sometimes can forget that appealing to fairness and reason can work too. When it doesn't, then is when legal remedies should be pursued.

    Posted by: Elliott | Jul 12, 2014 4:18:04 PM


  5. If this isn't illegal action, I don't know what is.

    Posted by: Matt27 | Jul 12, 2014 4:37:39 PM


  6. I note with interest that the family structures enumberated by the City Councilmember did NOT include same-sex families. She may have heard the problem, but her understanding of it has been carefully translated into heterospeak.

    Posted by: Keppler | Jul 12, 2014 4:44:50 PM


  7. Brain if it's the "usual" hysteria, why in the world do you come here?

    Posted by: Tigernan | Jul 12, 2014 4:45:17 PM


  8. @tigernan

    I've been coming here for years, before all the click-driven headlines took over. I guess I'm a creature of habit. If it makes you feel better, I do come here much less now, and have almost entirely stopped commenting, so I"m pretty harmless.

    Posted by: Brian1 | Jul 12, 2014 4:50:33 PM


  9. Though I agree Towleroad uses tons of click-bait, this time I think the headline is true and appropriate. They were denied entry under the family rate. Whether they were allowed to pay more and enter is irrelevant.

    And I think that references to the days of "whites only" pools are completely relevant. It's exactly the same ignorance and discrimination at play here.

    Posted by: Wisebear | Jul 12, 2014 5:00:50 PM


  10. @Wisebear

    Actually it's totally different. There was no amount of money a black person could pay to swim in a whites only pool, because their presence would contaminate the pool. The headline states the pool manager took the same approach, no gays allowed in the pool. In fact, the Duggars with their brood of children would also have been denied the discount pass, as would any number of now typical family structures. So it's nothing like an anti gay ordinance. The town is pretty clear that they know the ordinance is old and needs to be updated. Yes, the pool employee should have been more flexible, but by all accounts they were very polite and encouraging, but they acted like bureaucrats and wouldn't break the silly rule. This is not at all the reception a black family would have received at a whites only pool, nor will the outcome be the same.

    Posted by: Brian1 | Jul 12, 2014 5:08:04 PM


  11. How do they accommodate single parent families? Are there no issues there?

    Posted by: apex | Jul 12, 2014 5:35:50 PM


  12. I am from a nearby town. I guarantee you that Galion is the anus of the world, a veritable pit of overweight, slovenly, disgusting, bigoted @$$holes.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Jul 12, 2014 5:43:34 PM


  13. What an awful place, Jamal. I wonder why any self-respecting lesbian couple would choose to raise children there! Oh, maybe there were reasonably priced housing options.

    Posted by: ben~andy | Jul 12, 2014 5:48:53 PM


  14. A journalist would realize this is the story:

    "...while it doesn't seem likely that change will happen in time for this summer..."

    WHY NOT? The rule was made by people, not a force of nature, and can be changed by people. WHY NOT this summer? Does the swimming pool god not hear the pleas of mortals in the summer? Does the town claim that a 90 day notice must be provided for any rule change? WHY? Will they conveniently forget next year until sometime in July?

    There's a story out there, but it isn't in here.

    Posted by: Joseph Pulitzer | Jul 12, 2014 5:59:39 PM


  15. Why not this summer, indeed!

    Posted by: Joe in Ct | Jul 12, 2014 7:06:31 PM


  16. The headline is dishonest. The story is offensive on it's own. It doesn't need "journalistic assistance". Christian, you can do better than this. I'm embarrassed for you.

    Posted by: GeoffreyPS | Jul 12, 2014 8:13:26 PM


  17. Aww man.... apostrophe fail! I'm off to flog myself.

    Posted by: GeoffreyPS | Jul 12, 2014 8:15:22 PM


  18. Bull. Nothing this summer? These family pays taxes to this municipality and they are denied entry to a public recreation area? They should file a lawsuit for discrimination. That way the whole community's tax monies can be put to good use paying out the damages.

    Posted by: Todd | Jul 12, 2014 8:21:02 PM


  19. Mayor? City Manager? Unable to waive a 'Rule' as written in order to accommodate this Family's application for a Family Pass? Ridiculous. Someone has the 'power' to waive the rule as written in order to make this happen pending the official City Council approval the new wording, most Manager of the Rec department or whatever department to pool falls under.

    Posted by: RexTIII | Jul 13, 2014 4:00:44 AM


  20. Since "mother, father, and up to three children" apparently discriminates against single-parent families as well, I have to wonder how the policy was used in their cases.

    Posted by: radioredrafts | Jul 13, 2014 9:50:23 PM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Australian Judge Compares Homosexuality With Incest And Child Abuse« «