Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:13 AM
 
14,917 posts, read 13,109,537 times
Reputation: 4828

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ObserverNY View Post
And if the baker responded that way, don't you think MOST Jews would say, "You're a schm**k!" and take their business elsewhere rather than going through the expense and hassle of a lawsuit?
Lawsuit? Expense and hassle? What are you talking about?

 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:16 AM
 
3,550 posts, read 2,558,560 times
Reputation: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
I'm not asking you. I know you're stance of anti-discrimination laws. You believe they are, like everything else on this planet, antisemitic.

I'm asking a poster who says that he or she agrees with anti-discrimination laws in general, but that this case should not fall under them do to some sort of artistic exception.
I never said I was against anti-discrimination laws, only that they should be applied in very limited ways.
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:19 AM
 
1,596 posts, read 1,159,672 times
Reputation: 178
I quit serving Republicans and Democrats at my place of business.

I JUST DON'T LIKE THEM!
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:20 AM
 
14,917 posts, read 13,109,537 times
Reputation: 4828
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew View Post
I never said I was against anti-discrimination laws, only that they should be applied in very limited ways.
Please tell me about the anti-discrimination laws you support and the limited circumstances in which they should be applied.
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
14,561 posts, read 23,078,885 times
Reputation: 10357
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew View Post
no.
Then your entire premise is false. End of story.

Just for the sake of my entertainment though, I'll humor you.

Quote:
so lets make a banning all liberals from owning businesses unless they embrace conservatism in their action.
Again, false premise. No one is being banned from opening a business or being forced to "embrace" any ideology. Just curious, what does "embrace conservatism" entail?

Quote:
we will keep are businesses open according to our religions even if it's against the law.
Your internet tough guy act doesn't impress me.

Quote:
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.
LOL....such a drama queen.

Quote:
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.
Well first off, your problem is that I seriously doubt you could find 1 million business owners in the country...much less your area of jurisdiction... who would be willing to so blatantly discriminate against others, much less taking it to the levels you suggest.

Your second problem is that even if you COULD find those people to oppose it, that does nothing to stop the enforcement. We could just as easily execute wage garnishments, levies, and seizures against one million as we could against one.

Quote:
I also assume you are against Martin Luther King JR. who was against unjust laws.
One small problem there. MLK fought against discrimination, not for discrimination.

Quote:
"gay rights law" are just as bad as Jim Crow.
See above.

Quote:
how about we boycott all liberal business.
You could try.
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:25 AM
 
Location: On the border of off the grid
3,179 posts, read 3,167,854 times
Reputation: 863
Back to the State of Oregon where this incident happened. Based on my read of the law, the baker can be found guilty.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/659a.html

http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/153.018

Quote:
(d) $500 for a Class D violation. [1999 c.1051 §6; 2003 c.737 §103; 2011 c.597 §7]
That is the MAXIMUM that the baker can be fined.
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Planet earth
3,617 posts, read 1,823,349 times
Reputation: 1258
The baker did not go to the government & petition (thereby demanding his morality forced upon society) to have all potential same sex marriage couple from having wedding cake. He just refused to be a part of it, not denying them of an opportunity to same sex wedding cake, just denying his personal participation in it. The same cannot be said about the same sex couple because they DID go to the government, in an attempt to FORCE all of society accept as normal that which society does not.

BIG difference. Which is statist? Which respects people?

I'm certain the baker doesn't give two squats about whether or not these lesbians marry other than through his normal vote against a thing becoming law. What he DID care about is whether or not he could be compelled to assist with what he considers an abomination to GOD's will.

Do we have to accept bestiality as normal? Do we have to accept NAMBLA as normal? When can we say, I don't approve, therefore I will not participate? When can we direct our lives, and the actions contained in those lives based upon our morals or religion? When can we say I don't agree, but I won't try to stop you, at the same time I refuse to assist you meet your goals simply because I don't agree?

You cannot compel people to accept as normal that which they find abnormal. No law can cause this. No law can change free will. No law...
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:36 AM
 
14,917 posts, read 13,109,537 times
Reputation: 4828
Quote:
Originally Posted by ObserverNY View Post
Back to the State of Oregon where this incident happened. Based on my read of the law, the baker can be found guilty.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/659a.html

ORS 153.018 - Maximum fines - 2011 Oregon Revised Statutes



That is the MAXIMUM that the baker can be fined.
You're in the wrong section
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:36 AM
 
Location: On the border of off the grid
3,179 posts, read 3,167,854 times
Reputation: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by KS_Referee View Post
The baker did not go to the government & petition (thereby demanding his morality forced upon society) to have all potential same sex marriage couple from having wedding cake. He just refused to be a part of it, not denying them of an opportunity to same sex wedding cake, just denying his personal participation in it. The same cannot be said about the same sex couple because they DID go to the government, in an attempt to FORCE all of society accept as normal that which society does not.

BIG difference. Which is statist? Which respects people?

I'm certain the baker doesn't give two squats about whether or not these lesbians marry other than through his normal vote against a thing becoming law. What he DID care about is whether or not he could be compelled to assist with what he considers an abomination to GOD's will.

Do we have to accept bestiality as normal? Do we have to accept NAMBLA as normal? When can we say, I don't approve, therefore I will not participate? When can we direct our lives, and the actions contained in those lives based upon our morals or religion? When can we say I don't agree, but I won't try to stop you, at the same time I refuse to assist you meet your goals simply because I don't agree?

You cannot compel people to accept as normal that which they find abnormal. No law can cause this. No law can change free will. No law...
It all depends on the State in which you live. Clearly, all of the blue States which elected our Dear Leader have put legislation in place that states you CAN be fined if you refuse to provide someone, based on their "sexual orientation", with "public accommodations".

http://www.irem.org/pdfs/publicpolic...rimination.pdf
 
Old 02-07-2013, 11:38 AM
 
29,510 posts, read 14,673,560 times
Reputation: 14459
I just don't get it. It's his business , his choice whom he chooses to bake for. The couple should just get over it and move on to another baker that wants their business.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:53 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top