Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been at the receiving end of hate speech, but never unfair business or hiring practices... if I were refused service, housing or employment because I'm Jewish, I'd be filing a lawsuit faster than they could say anti-Semite. I don't care what you believe or who you hate, but you'd better check those opinions at the door while serving the public.
Under Federal Law, a small private business with fewer than 15 employees is NOT required to adhere:
(b)Nothing in section 804 of this title (other than subsection (c)) shall apply to--
(1) any single-family house sold or rented by an owner: Provided, That such private individual owner does not own more than three such single-family houses at any one time:
Know the law before you rush to file a lawsuit, simply because you believe people are not within their rights to deny you a service, job or housing based on their own preferences/dislikes.
Yes, he discriminates against homosexuals when it comes to DESIGNING and DECORATING a WEDDING CAKE.
A WEDDING CAKE isn't just any old cake. It's a work of art. It's meant to reflect the couple's personality and aesthetic. It's one of the things that DEFINES a wedding. As a woman, I recognize that the wedding gown and the wedding cake and the floral arrangements and the music choices are all creative aspects that are expressions of the couple, a kind of free speech if you will. They are memorable, and as such, people will reference them. "Remember that dress Mary Jane wore at her wedding. It was perfection. I need to find out where she bought it, and who the designer was." "Remember that off-center wedding cake that Paul and Dora served at their wedding. The one with the orange cream filling. I need to find out who their baker was." "Remember Tim and Ilene's wedding. They had that jazz band to start things off, and then the DJ took over and I think everybody danced until daylight the next day. I wonder if they have the playlist; I think I still have the DJ's card." But more than being memorable, these things personalize and distinguish weddings, so that they reflect the people getting married. If Paul and Dora served an off-center wedding cake filled with orange cream, maybe they also serviced crawfish and gumbo, had a zydeco band, and Dora wore a knee-length wedding dress rather than a gown. Maybe for party favors they handed out masks and strings of beads. These things express the couple. And the people who they hired to make their wedding happen were working with them to express the couple.
If someone doesn't agree with what you want to express at something so personal and so important, why would you want to hire them? Why would you sue them if they didn't want to work with you? To what end? If I want a wedding cake with square tiers, and a baker tells me he doesn't do square tiers, do I sue him, or do I find a baker that will make what I want him to make? If I want my wedding itinerary written on purple paper and the stationery store has a policy where they only print wedding materials on white or ivory paper, I find another stationery store.
What you're suggesting might make for justifiable Exemptions from non-discrimination laws for businesses. If I were a state legislator I might even put time into figuring out language that worked. As things stand, the baker broke the law, largely because he was too honest about the reason for not making the cake.
Quick story - I have been a licensed Real Estate Broker for over 30 years. Many years ago, I sold the home of an old Italian woman to a Puerto Rican woman. The seller wanted to kill the deal because she doesn't like Puerto Ricans. I told her she was within her rights to kill the deal, however, by law, she still owed me a full commission because I brought her a "ready, willing and able buyer". As a Realtor, I am bound by Federal law not to discriminate in the showing/selling of real estate.
Oregon
Oregon recently enacted a law prohibiting discrimination in employment, housing, public
accommodation, public education, and foster parenting based on sexual orientation and gender
identity. The law is effective January 1, 2008
Upon a read of the Oregon law and the definition of "public accommodation", the baker will be found guilty.
Do you think the lesbian will still want him to bake her a cake after that?
If someone doesn't agree with what you want to express at something so personal and so important, why would you want to hire them? Why would you sue them if they didn't want to work with you? To what end? If I want a wedding cake with square tiers, and a baker tells me he doesn't do square tiers, do I sue him, or do I find a baker that will make what I want him to make? If I want my wedding itinerary written on purple paper and the stationery store has a policy where they only print wedding materials on white or ivory paper, I find another stationery store.
Some people prefer to be dictatorial and force their views on others, even if they end up working with someone who never will share those views. So the wedding and its meaning becomes secondary, making a point and punishing others is first.
You can be assured if it was written into law that all bakers had to make round and square cakes, then people would sue if one bakery didn't provide a square cake. Even though that would be really stupid and petty, some people just like to bully to get their way when they are backed up by Big Brother. Not so tough if they are on their own though.
There are many dumb laws on the books and suing has become a hobby for some people.
Quick story - I have been a licensed Real Estate Broker for over 30 years. Many years ago, I sold the home of an old Italian woman to a Puerto Rican woman. The seller wanted to kill the deal because she doesn't like Puerto Ricans. I told her she was within her rights to kill the deal, however, by law, she still owed me a full commission because I brought her a "ready, willing and able buyer". As a Realtor, I am bound by Federal law not to discriminate in the showing/selling of real estate.
Rosa Parks was brave. She didn't go running to someone bigger and stronger to fight for her. These women went crying to the state. They are NO Rosa Parks, quite the opposite. They could have told the guy off themselves but they had to go hide behind big daddy government to do their dirty work. Remember protesting? People would get together as individuals and make a statement. Feminists used to be good at this. Not now, go to the government for everything that hurts your feelings.
Very big difference. The discrimination against Rosa Parks was legal at the time. Had the city bus driver tried forcing her to the back of the bus in violation of anti-discrimination laws she would not have been arrested for refusal and she probably would have called "big daddy government" to file a complaint and have the bus-driver fired.
What you're suggesting might make for justifiable Exemptions from non-discrimination laws for businesses. If I were a state legislator I might even put time into figuring out language that worked. As things stand, the baker broke the law, largely because he was too honest about the reason for not making the cake.
Don't try to deflect and change the subject. Answer my question.
Are the Jews (or anyone, really) being FORCED to operate their business? Yes or no?
no.
so lets make a banning all liberals from owning businesses unless they embrace conservatism in their action.
we will keep are businesses open according to our religions even if it's against the law.
forcing Jewish run buisness to close has been done before by many people including the NAZIs they only accomplished that by murder and I have suspect you will do try to do the same thing when we defy your anti semetic law.
right now the government can't enforce the law on immigration, housing (there are easily over a 100,000 illegal apartments in NYC), jay walking etc. how do you expect them to enforce law that people are willing to be killed for over?
there are 2 options selectively enforce it (like Jay Walking) or murder. you seem to be in favor of option 2.
Quote:
I honestly couldn't care less how the Jews, Muslims, Christians, or any other religious group, takes my views. All I care about is the law.
if millions of people ignore the law on principle then the only way to enforce it is by murder will you take the first shot.
I also assume you are against Martin Luther King JR. who was against unjust laws.
"gay rights law" are just as bad as Jim Crow.
Quote:
Maybe. Maybe not.
how about we boycott all liberal business.
Quote:
I'm not sure how you would hide discrimination. Good luck with that, though. I also doubt your local DA is worried about anything. I know I sure wouldn't.
they only have to worry if they force people to violate their religions. which they very rarely do.
Quote:
Then you use the methods I outlined in a previous post. Wage garnishments, liens, seizures...etc. The methods are there to enforce both civil and criminal judgements.
If around a million people refuse to obey a law, none of those methods will work with out brutal force. how many people to plan on killing yourself?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
