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 09-13-2017, 01:18 PM
 
45,226 posts, read 26,443,162 times
Reputation: 24984

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post
Where does the law state you must labour for someone else? - sounds like some odd laws over there.
did you read the thread?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
22,216 posts, read 21,676,363 times
Reputation: 7608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
did you read the thread?
Is there a law that states you must labour for someone else?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:22 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,207,906 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Incorrect. That ruling found that the state could deny unemployment benefits to a person fired for violating a state prohibition. Who's claiming unemployment benefits in baker vs. Colorado? No one.
BOTH cases are about state laws that supersede peoples religious belief.

Religious beliefs do not trump generally applicable law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
22,216 posts, read 21,676,363 times
Reputation: 7608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Lighten up, it's a cake.
I'm not the one equating selling what is just another cake, with slavery.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:29 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,026 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13714
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
BOTH cases are about state laws that supersede peoples religious belief.
Incorrect. The state vs Smith case is exclusively about state benefits.

The baker is alleging the violation of his US Constitutional First Amendment Rights in the baker vs. Colorado case.

BIG difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:35 PM
 
18,562 posts, read 7,372,997 times
Reputation: 11376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post
Do you think the freedom to practice your religion free from government interference, actually exists? -well it doesn't.

The baker was declining to do something - follow the law.

Bakers should have the same right to discriminate as doctors -none or total. There is nothing inherently sacred about the life of a stranger, so "forcing" a doctor to save a life, would be the same as "forcing a baker to bake a cake.
Yes, exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:39 PM
 
18,562 posts, read 7,372,997 times
Reputation: 11376
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Within laws and regulations. Simple is it not?
Yes, it's simple, but not the way you think. The only laws that can compel forced labor are those that require convicts to labor as part of their sentence. Otherwise, as the Thirteenth Amendment makes clear, no law or regulation can force a person to work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:41 PM
 
18,562 posts, read 7,372,997 times
Reputation: 11376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post
I'm not the one equating selling what is just another cake, with slavery.
Get acquainted with the facts, Joe. It's not a question of selling a cake.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Top of the South, NZ
22,216 posts, read 21,676,363 times
Reputation: 7608
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9 View Post
Get acquainted with the facts, Joe. It's not a question of selling a cake.
Not sure what your point is - I'm saying that selling just another cake, isn't slavery -do you disagree?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2017, 02:13 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,207,906 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Incorrect. The state vs Smith case is exclusively about state benefits.

The baker is alleging the violation of his US Constitutional First Amendment Rights in the baker vs. Colorado case.

BIG difference.
The case was a first amendment case v state law.

Quote:
Their applications for unemployment compensation were denied by the State of Oregon under a state law disqualifying employees discharged for work-related "misconduct." Holding that the denials violated respondents' First Amendment free exercise rights,
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/494/872

The state won the case because it was a neutral generally applicable law, just like the public accommodation law is a neutral generally applicable law.

Religious belief does not trump generally applicable law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:00 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