Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis found in contempt, going to jail

[daughtersrus]

Are you referring to Kerry or Hillary?

Sorry.

In IL, the Secretary of State's office controls the DMV

 

[Unas]

Sorry, I realized I shouldn't feed trolls.

 

[Unas]

Sorry.

In IL, the Secretary of State's office controls the DMV

It's OK, I mistook you for another poster and I thought it might be more of that bogus "so and so is a Muslim" stuff.

Be well.

 

[Gracie09]

Actually, it looks like a market selling lulavim (palm fronds) and other traditional items for the Jewish holiday of Sukkot (which occurs in a few weeks). It might be operated by a synagogue or congregation, but judging by the variety of clothes, I think not. Or maybe it's a congregation that arranged for outside sellers.

I'm not sure why they would choose to restrict women, unless they were either planning services at some point or perhaps the sheer density of the crowd created an immodest environment. But I'm not Orthodox, so there may be some other reason.

Just because they put until doesn't mean it's legally enforceable. I can put any sign I want up in my place of business. It doesn't mean the courts would back me on it.

 

[kamik86]

You can put up a sign. You can even kick out whomever you want... and it will all work out until someone decides it isn't right and sues you for discrimination.

So if you put up a sign against homosexuals and no one in your area cared (or no one noticed... that little flag sticker... yeah I probably wouldn't even have seen it.) It would be fine. Actually even if someone noticed the sticker you would still be ok until you actually denied service to someone (so until someone came in that was flamboyant enough to make you believe they were homosexual -since most people don't go around announcing it at every store- and you kicked them out). At that point it may still be fine and you still may not have any issues unless that person you kicked out wants to pursue it. If they don't and just choose to never go back you may not hear anything about it again. Or maybe they just complain on facebook.

This though causes someone else that is more interested in fighting for civil rights (or just wants to make a scene and get 5 min of fame) to come in and tell you they are gay just to see if you will kick them out. (Which is legal, just like how some groups will send a white guy to ask about a job or renting an apartment and then send a black guy to do the same, to see if they get different answers) . When you do kick them out, they sue you.

Now your still able to keep kicking them out until your court date... however once you get to your court date and your sign and practice are deemed illegal at this point months later is when you actually have to take them down.

That was alot of time for someone to get a picture to post online.

 

[mnrose]

But it is apparently way less time than it takes to type "yes" or "no" to the simple question of whether the people who support Ms. Davis would similarly support a Quaker who won't issue concealed carry licenses or a Muslim who refuses to allow driver's licenses to women. Same exact thing. Yet, there is no time to answer "that" question. Crickets. It seems clear to me that the answer would have to be YES, but since they won't answer, I'm guessing that these "rights" to refuse service only extend to Christian beliefs.

 

[Chocolate Cake]

But it is apparently way less time than it takes to type "yes" or "no" to the simple question of whether the people who support Ms. Davis would similarly support a Quaker who won't issue concealed carry licenses or a Muslim who refuses to allow driver's licenses to women. Same exact thing. Yet, there is no time to answer "that" question. Crickets. It seems clear to me that the answer would have to be YES, but since they won't answer, I'm guessing that these "rights" to refuse service only extend to Christian beliefs.

Yup.

 

[KimR]

But it is apparently way less time than it takes to type "yes" or "no" to the simple question of whether the people who support Ms. Davis would similarly support a Quaker who won't issue concealed carry licenses or a Muslim who refuses to allow driver's licenses to women. Same exact thing. Yet, there is no time to answer "that" question. Crickets. It seems clear to me that the answer would have to be YES, but since they won't answer, I'm guessing that these "rights" to refuse service only extend to Christian beliefs.

Exactly - and not just Christian beliefs in general, but THEIR Christian beliefs.

 

[Christine]

But it is apparently way less time than it takes to type "yes" or "no" to the simple question of whether the people who support Ms. Davis would similarly support a Quaker who won't issue concealed carry licenses or a Muslim who refuses to allow driver's licenses to women. Same exact thing. Yet, there is no time to answer "that" question. Crickets. It seems clear to me that the answer would have to be YES, but since they won't answer, I'm guessing that these "rights" to refuse service only extend to Christian beliefs.

I think the issue is that their Christian rights have been the mainstream, dominate force for a LONG, LONG time. Never challenged, always accepted, always the majority.

In order to answer the question that has been posed time and time again, it takes a whole lot of introspection into the core belief system of "my way is THE way, my majority rules" and so on. I don't think that these folks are even aware, consciously, of how wrong their way of thinking is. This country's demographics have changed significantly in the last 50 years. Some people are able to go with the flow and adapt and others are so threatened by change and not being the "leader" or "top dog" anymore that it's a kicking and screaming fight with no reasoning with them.

 

[luvsJack]

So did yall see the case of the barber who refused to cut a womans hair? She is suing. Wasn't religious, just that he doesn't cut women's hair.

 

[sam_gordon]

I have wondered how Shapes Fitness for Women is allowed to stay open. I wonder if just no men have tried to join.

 

[Dawnlight]

Actually, it looks like a market selling lulavim (palm fronds) and other traditional items for the Jewish holiday of Sukkot (which occurs in a few weeks). It might be operated by a synagogue or congregation, but judging by the variety of clothes, I think not. Or maybe it's a congregation that arranged for outside sellers.

I'm not sure why they would choose to restrict women, unless they were either planning services at some point or perhaps the sheer density of the crowd created an immodest environment. But I'm not Orthodox, so there may be some other reason.

It's probably in one of the heavily Orthodox neighborhoods in NY, such as Crown Heights. In many of the ultra-orthodox and Hassidic communities men and women are separated, but it isn't enforceable in legal terms, just social and religious terms. The mitzvah of the 4 species is a requirement for men, but only encouraged for women, so that is most likely the reason for it being restricted to men only. The close quarters of a packed crowd would also be a concern. Another reason may be that it's a very spiritual time to get these 4 species and one should take the utmost care in finding the choicest items, so having women around would be seen as a potential distraction to the task at hand (much like having men and women mixed in a prayer setting).

Just because they put until doesn't mean it's legally enforceable. I can put any sign I want up in my place of business. It doesn't mean the courts would back me on it.

Yes, this is true, but those who live by the religious requirements of that community know that the fallout of not observing the separation of men and women will be costly.

If outsiders wanted to stroll through no one can stop them, legally, but why would one want to? If a person goes to visit a mosque and they are not of that faith, they will still be asked to remove shoes. It's not discriminatory; it's respect for other people's faith.

 

[Hrhpd]

I have wondered how Shapes Fitness for Women is allowed to stay open. I wonder if just no men have tried to join.

The Shapes business in Florida obviously caters to women, but men are not excluded. I was curious and went and read the "about" and the "membership" parts on their corporate website. Nowhere does it say the gym is only for women. They use very gender neutral words like "member" and "guest." Only on a website in South Africa did it mention being able to exercise without men around. It implies it is for women only, but there is nowhere where it says "men are not allowed" so a man probably could join if he felt comfortable enough.

 

[Hrhpd]

So did yall see the case of the barber who refused to cut a womans hair? She is suing. Wasn't religious, just that he doesn't cut women's hair.

link?

 

[luvsJack]

link?

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2015/09/08/barbershop-fined-for-refusing-to-cut-womans-hair/

I didn't actually read it here but just heard it on the news while I was getting ready this morning. On the news they said she was suing him, here it says he was fined. So whichever.

 

[LetsTalkWDW]

 

[experiment_6two6]

Christian owner of a private flower shop that if she refused to do the flowers for a you know what marriage

Can you really not say gay? I mean let's be real here, it should just be a "marriage", because gay people don't drive gay cars, and eat gay cake on their birthday... but now the LGTBQA community gets lumped into "you know what" It's so terrible you can't even say the word gay? Really?

 

[Goofy_Disney_Dad]

Can you really not say gay? I mean let's be real here, it should just be a "marriage", because gay people don't drive gay cars, and eat gay cake on their birthday... but now the LGTBQA community gets lumped into "you know what" It's so terrible you can't even say the word gay? Really?

I don't think it's a decision to not use gay, but that the sex portion of same sex marriage gets censored here. I could be wrong, but that is how I always interpreted it.

Edited to add: And who knew it no longer is censored? I'm impressed!

 

[experiment_6two6]

I don't think it's a decision to not use gay, but that the sex portion of same sex marriage gets censored here. I could be wrong, but that is how I always interpreted it.

Edited to add: And who knew it no longer is censored? I'm impressed!

Thanks for bringing that to my attention, but your post wasn't censored!

 

[Goofy_Disney_Dad]

Thanks for bringing that to my attention, but your post wasn't censored!

I kinda edited it after it posted because it's the first time I've ever seen "sex" not get censored out here. I'm completely surprised by it as well.