I think it all boils down to litigation risk and Randy's mention earlier of the perceived tie between one's opinion on abortion and one's religion. As i stated above, i don't think that one's opinion on abortion is truly a religious belief, but you can bet if someone wanted to litigate it, they'd try to make that argument. It would be harder (not impossible maybe, but harder) to make the same connection on strip clubs IMHO.

Just my two cents on an interesting topic.

I'm going to add this: i think if it got to a point in this country that Planned Parenthood and similar organizations were shut out en masse by the banking industry, then we would see legislation on the matter. As it now stands, an individual bank can refuse to do business with such organizations, but all that organization has to do is walk (well, someone representing the organization anyway, since organizations can't walk) down the street or to an adjacent town or city and get the loan.

I'm not trying to make any political or religious statement here, just what seems true to me--individual banks that either because of true moral/ethical concerns OR because they want to make a moral/ethical/political statement can refuse such loans--but they aren't truly impacting those organizations because of what i've stated above. And i believe (again, as i stated above) that if such organizations were ever truly shut out from access to credit, then legislation on the matter would come down from above. Banks can refuse customers because they want to (as long as it isn't a blatant fair lending issue)....up to the point that those organizations are so credit-challenged that it truly does become a political issue that Congress must resolve.

Originally Posted by David Dickinson
I know of many clients that will not make loans to strip clubs or similar places. They have that right.

burkemi said:
”How is the Planned Parenthood question any different at all from this? Genuinely curious where the separation is?”

It isn’t. My point is that no creditor has to make a loan to anyone they don’t wan to. Reg B even says so. Reg B says you can’t illegally discriminate

I think the point was if the borrower meets your bank's credentials for lending, make the loan. The borrower could be some shell corporation "ABC Company, LLC d/b/a We Wash Dogs" and they might rent the space to Planned Parenthood or Planned Pole Dancing. The General Public doesn't know who the customer got the loan from.

"The General Public doesn't know who the customer got the loan from."[/]
I don't think this is a factor. The bank ownership/management doesn't want to make a loan to this type of business operation based on an ethical position. Whether it is known to the public probably doesn't matter. Whether the applicant meets the bank's lending credentials also doesn't matter, if you're talking about DTI, LTV, etc.