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 02-08-2013, 03:38 PM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,373,171 times
Reputation: 4113

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinebar View Post
Hahahaha.....

It turns out that Klein is not only a bigot baker, he was also operating without a license......for eighteen months.

He did pay to renew his license, but only when the USDA showed up to do a routine inspection.

I just heard it on the news and I can't find anything on-line yet about it but when I do, I'll be sure and post a link to the story.

It seems like not only is he a homophobe and a bigot, he's not above trying to get away with not taking care of what is required of businesses (I wonder if there's anything in the bible about that?).

Maybe he forgot. For eighteen months.

What a loser.
Classic. Just classic.

 
Old 02-09-2013, 01:23 AM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
14,561 posts, read 23,050,177 times
Reputation: 10356
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew View Post
1. for me Jewish Law > United States Constitution
Awesome. You know how much your opinion matters?

None.

Quote:
2. due to the first amendment there is no difference between the 2.
Umm, no, sorry. That's not the way it works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Jew View Post
and if every single Orthodox Jew in the city refuses to do so, or pay the fines, or couporate with the government in any way.

there are 2 options selectively enforce it (only go after 1 person)
or murder. (you seem to be in favor of the later)

let me give you a little Jewish American History.
in the Lower East side throughout the 1890's it was forbidden to work on Sunday (due to the Blue Laws), but they were never enforced on masse (yes many people were arrested) because majority of all people still broke them publicly. The only way they could have gotten every single Jew to stop working on Sunday would have been by murder.
We don't have to murder you to enforce the law, though if you actively try to resist it can lead to that...though to be technical that would be justifiable homicide rather than murder, and I doubt the NYPD will lose any sleep over putting a few of you in the ground.

Quote:
no it doesn't please explain how it does.
no person who has same sex attraction is forced to go into business and if they want to go into business they would have to obey the law of the land and stop having homosexual relations.
just like (which according to you is fine)
no Jews who follows Judaism is is forced to go into business and if they want to go into business they would have to obey the law of the land and stop following Judaism.
Your logic is flawed, as usual. The law in question does not force anyone to do anything, the choice is left to them. Your proposed law actively forces homosexuals out of the business community.

Quote:
which according to the US Constitution can not force people to violate their religion
Wrong.

Quote:
But Oregon's ban on the possession of peyote is not a law specifically aimed at a physical act engaged in for a religious reason. Rather, it is a law that applies to everyone who might possess peyote, for whatever reason—a "neutral law of general applicability," in the Court's phrasing. The Court characterized Smith's and Black's argument as an attempt to use their religious motivation to use peyote in order to place themselves beyond the reach of Oregon's neutral, generally applicable ban on the possession of peyote. The Court held that the First Amendment's protection of the "free exercise" of religion does not allow a person to use a religious motivation as a reason not to obey such generally applicable laws. "To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself." Thus, the Court had held that religious beliefs did not excuse people from complying with laws forbidding polygamy, child labor laws, Sunday closing laws, laws requiring citizens to register for Selective Service, and laws requiring the payment of Social Security taxes.
Employment Division v. Smith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
If the police tried to seize the property of a single business they could get away with it, but if almost every single store in a neighborhood refuses to obey that law you will see the police acting like they did with the boycott in the deep south except we will fight back. and people will be killed.
I'm glad you now admit that you would murder people for "gay rights"
They won't be seizing it all at once. They'll do it as the rulings come down and each individual case. You want to use force to oppose these actions? Be my guest. My money is on the NYPD, and I'm sure you'll have a lovely funeral.

Quote:
more then 90% of all people who call themselves Orthodox jews are against gay "marriage".
more then 50% of all Jews who are Russian are against gay "marriage".
Orthodox and Russian Jews are majority of all Jews in NYC.
Source it.

Quote:
wrong because how to handle child abuses cases is a issue where there is a divide in the Orthodox community. There is no devide when it comes to forcing Jews to violate Judaism. He is afraid for his seat, not to mention forcing people to violate Catholicism will never go over well in non Jeiwhs neighborhoods like in Dyker Heights.


understand at least half of Brooklyn is against this if Coumo would actually try and force every single store he would have to call in the National guard. Coumo will not want to go in to a presidental elecetion with images of the police beating up people for following their region.


1. he would not do it.
2. he will never get that far unless people are killed.



maybe because you are not smart enough to understand your own words.
Have anything solid to back up your hypothetical?
 
Old 02-09-2013, 08:26 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,373,171 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post

Have anything solid to back up your hypothetical?
It's called a stool.

Although it's often semi-solid.

 
Old 02-09-2013, 10:03 AM
 
Location: The Cascade Foothills
10,942 posts, read 10,246,923 times
Reputation: 6476
I think it's neat that the couple who were denied a cake by a bigot baker, who were offered a free wedding cake by a celebrity chef, asked him to make the bride's cake instead, since they had already committed to another local bakery for the wedding cake.

They could easily have dumped the local bakery in favor of the more high profile chef, but chose instead to honor their commitment to the other bakery.

Quote:
A lesbian couple denied a wedding cake by Gresham bakery owners who disagreed with same-sex marriage said Friday they've accepted a free cake offer from Food Network star chef Duff Goldman.

Laurel Bowman of Portland and her fiancée said they’d already bought a wedding cake from Southeast Portland bakery Pastrygirl, when Goldman offered to bake and deliver a cake to them from Los Angeles.

The couple, who plan to get married sometime this summer, said they’ve asked the "Ace of Cakes" star to make a bride's cake, so they can honor their commitment to Pastrygirl.
Same-sex couple accepts Food Network chef's free wedding cake offer after bakery denies request | OregonLive.com

I think it says a lot about them - and it's all good.
 
Old 02-09-2013, 07:48 PM
 
3,448 posts, read 3,130,542 times
Reputation: 478
Plain and simple....the cake is an ornament which enhances the social event to one of, a special occasion.

Each cake would be unique and inspired by the hope and joy of the couple. Each cake would only follow a rough outline and finish in the specialty bakers certain talent which we know, includes a translation of the unique couple including the event and his freedom to participate, in sharing the special adornment to the occasion.

An individual cannot be inspired to create an artistic expression if the inspiration is not there. The Gov also cannot force an artistic specialty by a Baker any more then a Gov forcing a painter to paint a picture of two gay men, in whatever setting.

Forcing a Baker to bake a special cake for something which he is not inspired, interferes with his freedom to express his talent without force.

Last edited by stargazzer; 02-09-2013 at 08:02 PM..
 
Old 02-09-2013, 08:18 PM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,900,593 times
Reputation: 23665
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazzer View Post
Plain and simple....the cake is an ornament which enhances the social event to one of, a special occasion.

Each cake would be unique and inspired by the hope and joy of the couple. Each cake would only follow a rough outline and finish in the specialty bakers certain talent which we know, includes a translation of the unique couple including the event and his freedom to participate, in sharing the special adornment to the occasion.

An individual cannot be inspired to create an artistic expression if the inspiration is not there. The Gov also cannot force an artistic specialty by a Baker any more then a Gov forcing a painter to paint a picture of two gay men, in whatever setting.

Forcing a Baker to bake a special cake for something which he is not inspired, interferes with his freedom to express his talent without force.
Then he should open a private cake business from home, which isn't subject to the laws of public accommodations - plain and simple. That's what most visual artists do, but those who have chosen to maintain a public storefront are subject to anti-discrimination laws. In other words, there's a difference between a place like "Picture People" and an individual who does photography without a storefront.
 
Old 02-09-2013, 08:25 PM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,900,593 times
Reputation: 23665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinebar View Post
I think it's neat that the couple who were denied a cake by a bigot baker, who were offered a free wedding cake by a celebrity chef, asked him to make the bride's cake instead, since they had already committed to another local bakery for the wedding cake.

They could easily have dumped the local bakery in favor of the more high profile chef, but chose instead to honor their commitment to the other bakery.

Same-sex couple accepts Food Network chef's free wedding cake offer after bakery denies request | OregonLive.com

I think it says a lot about them - and it's all good.
That is awesome... and Duff makes some SWEET-looking cakes!! He will definitely do a better job than Mr. Bigot Baker, anyway. LOL

Check out his work: Charm City Cakes | Gallery
 
Old 02-09-2013, 08:26 PM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,900,593 times
Reputation: 23665
(and yes, it's also very cool how the couple honored their other order... seems they have more integrity than Mr. Bigot, huh?)
 
Old 02-09-2013, 08:47 PM
 
3,448 posts, read 3,130,542 times
Reputation: 478
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980 View Post
Then he should open a private cake business from home, which isn't subject to the laws of public accommodations - plain and simple. That's what most visual artists do, but those who have chosen to maintain a public storefront are subject to anti-discrimination laws. In other words, there's a difference between a place like "Picture People" and an individual who does photography without a storefront.

So are you saying that if an artist has a shop and does portraits, the artist is without recourse in refusing if a gay couple want a portrait in a questionable setting ? Whats the deal.
 
Old 02-09-2013, 08:52 PM
 
Location: In the Redwoods
30,286 posts, read 51,900,593 times
Reputation: 23665
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazzer View Post
So are you saying that if an artist has a shop and does portraits, the artist is without recourse in refusing if a gay couple want a portrait in a questionable setting ? Whats the deal.
I don't know the details that specifically, I just know the laws only apply to public accommodations. So basically if you operate from a public storefront, as opposed to a home or private club, you are subject to state anti-discrimination laws. These laws differ from state to state, but in Oregon (where this story occurred) they do include sexual orientation as a protected class.
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:42 PM.

© 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