Topic: Should a Jewish resturant owner be forced to serve a skinhead? (Read 9152 times)

Well the  Anthony Weiner (Dem.) case seemed to contradict that   let's see how well he fares...  

Btw. would the question also apply if Weiner was the waiter and the skinhead was gay?

Obama claims he's christian, misdirects people into thinking he's secretly muslim, but is actually secretly a Jewish guy in blackface 

hardly.

implication: Bitcoin was created by a jew.

De Facto they have all privileges. World is run by jews.

What is the point of focusing on a jewish person? Do they have any privilege over muslim restaurant owners? I don't think so.

They were Gauls

Valid point, But I was speaking more along the lines of the Germany we know and love today... The culturally and linguistically linked area that pieced itself together from the shattered remnants of the Holy Roman Empire... with Jews included like raisins in a fruitcake.

are you telling me Asterix and Obelix did not exist?

This is not right.
Julius Ceasar was the first to call the region east of the Rhine Germania, this was before 44BC. The first Jews came to Germania at the end of 1AD. Back than the Netherlands and the Flemish and German part of Belgium also belonged to it but besides that it was the Germany we know today. The first Jews probably hadn't much trouble here because the Germanic Tribes (and Nordic ones) where not really barbarians like people assume they were. If you learn more from the Germanic and Nordic Mythology you'll realize it is a beautiful and useful faith  (and I say this as an atheist). Maybe faith is a wrong name it was more some kind of wisdom that they told to each other from generation to generation. One of the things it said was to be good for strangers, and that those strangers had another god wasn't really a problem, because you had the freedom to choose your own favorite gods, and people back than didn't hate each other because you worshiped Wodan and your neighbor Freya. This eventually let to the destruction of a big part of our culture when Christianity came in like the Trojan horse.

But when the name already existed (and the people and culture actually already existed way back before that) Judaism was still something from the desert. 

Not that this all doesn't make your reasoning correct, the Jewish restaurant owner has the freedom to choose who he serves and who not. And the people against it who seem to be very pro the German people, should actually maybe learn their (own?) culture. Because freedom is in our genes but knocked down by faith and governments who want to control us, our ancestors would disapprove to force someone to do something he doesn't want, even if he worships a god we have no connection to. We should fight for our freedom, and freedom isn't something you can throw in the ring when it's beneficial for yourself. It is something that always should be applied, even for the people you don't like. As long as you don't harm anyone, you should do what you want, the Jewish person doesn't harm anyone if he doesn't serve the skinhead, the skinhead can eat somewhere else.

LOL since you don't live in NYC, why don't you just shut the fuck up?

No. Let the nazi bastard starve to death. I am not jew, my head is bold, but not "skinhead". If I happen to be around your eatery, I'll help you to finish that moron.

moral absolutely not. But neither is it moral to use violence against someone for doing that. Two wrongs do not make a right.

no one should be forced to do anything unless they are being forced to stop harming someone who is behaving peacefully.

Didn't I ignore this guy already?

Everyone is born into this world bawling their brains out and crapping their diapers.

Nobody has the right to tell anyone what to do.  No such right exists.

Only because of State force. Were his property rights respected, he could exclude the skinhead for no other reason than he was a goy. Freedom of association means freedom to not associate.

So you say.  But in the world we call "reality," where things actually happen, he could have made a bad decision and excluded the guy because of his race.  In that event, the guy could sue him, win an enormous judgment, and then guys with guns would show up and seize the property.

In this thing we call "reality," there are laws that say he can refuse service to this guy, even for no reason at all, with impunity.  However, if he refuses service for the wrong reason, he loses a lawsuit, loses everything he owns, perhaps even goes to prison.

People care a lot more about what happens to them in reality than in fantasies.

Doesn't matter. it's his right to refuse service for any reason whatsoever, even no reason at all.

Depends.  Why is the Jewish owner refusing to serve the guy?

Civil rights laws only protects certain classes, like race, religion or national origin.  If he's refusing to serve the guy because he is a Gentile, then that is prohibited.

However, politics is not a protected class.  He can refuse to serve a neo-Nazi, a guy whose haircut he doesn't like, a Democrat, a Republican, a lawyer, because he doesn't like lawyers, or any other non-protected class.

So the short answer is no, a Jewish owner of an eatery can't be forced to serve anyone he doesn't want to serve, unless the reason is that the person falls into a very narrow set of categories of "protected classes."  Political persuasion does not enter into this.

Just as a landlord could refuse to rent to a lawyer because he decided that lawyers tend to be a pain in the ass and sue him, he could refuse to rent to a skinhead because he decided that skinheads tend to trash the place.