Posted on 07/10/2023 4:14:11 PM PDT by Morgana
Jews accusing Jews of being too Jewish. That’s interesting.
They never did! Only God Almighty does!
And they shouldn’t!
Yep! Take it back!
She’s no rabbi. Jewish law prohibits women from being rabbis. She’s nothing but a pervert shaming Judaism.
In theory - no business can deny general service to anyone. If they wanna buy one of your cars or pre made cakes then service can’t be denied which was the entire point of the civil rights legislation.
This doesn’t stop leftist companies from denying service to people who’s ideologies they disagree with (even when they’re not being asked to honor those ideologies)
But somehow leftists think it’s “wrong” when a black photographer has to take pictures of a Klan Rally… but you must bake the gay cake…
It’s all gone topsy turvy.
Couldn’t the bakery have just thought of it as a Noah’s Ark themed event? The 17th day of the 7th month and all...
The bakery should charge them 4 times the price. Make the Perv lovers pay 💰 a higher premium. Cite the high cost of rainbow cake colorings. They can pay it or get lost.
Silly rabbi, kicks are for Trads!
Why can’t the homos bake their own cake?
I doubt this baker would be mau-maued into making swastika laced cookies for the Aryan Nation dweebs.
Of course it’s a tactic but people should wise up to it and just say “no”
“ Jews accusing Jews of being too Jewish. That’s interesting.”
Conservatives are Jews. Liberals are Jewish.
“The right to say “No” is the most basic human right a free person has”.
We reserve the right to refuse service to you,
Take your business back to Walgreen’s,
Have you tried your local zoo ?
You smell just like a communist,
You come through just like a Jew,
We reserve the right to refuse service to you.
— Kinky Friedman
“In theory - no business can deny general service to anyone.”
I have never heard that. May I see your data?
I know that protected classes can’t be denied service, but I don’t know of any theory that would legally prevent a conservative elected official from being asked to leave a restaurant owned by a liberal.
How does the following statement make any sense? I realize it’s dicta, but still, it just be wrong. The homosexual website designer would not be permitted to rely on any 1st Amendment right to refuse to fulfill the request of the anti-homosexual requester, so Colorado could force him to provide the design. Am I not correct on this? If not, where have I gone off the rails?
“Equally, the government could force a male website designer married to another man to design websites for an organization that advocates against same-sex marriage. ... As our precedents recognize, the First Amendment tolerates none of that.”
Reform synagogue I’d bet.
Oy Vey
I love how my Priest describes the Orthodox Sacrament of Marriage in his catechetical sessions:
"You need three things for the Sacrament of Marriage:
ONE man;
ONE woman;
ONE Priest.
Non-negotiable!"
I’m sure.
Don’t you also need a sponsor (i.e., best man)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.