Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

US Politics Hamsterwheel v2.0

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

US Politics Hamsterwheel v2.0

Old 10th Oct 2018, 21:10
  #16161 (permalink)  

Plastic PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 1,882
Thoughtful and cogent reply obgraham. As you say, there are two sides to most issues. I realize that, "It's true, the other side is just plain wrong, but that's just me!" to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but it did remind me of Oliver Cromwell, who wrote to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland on 5 August 1650, including a phrase that has become well known and frequently quoted: "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken." !

Also interesting is t
he UK's highest court ruling that Ashers bakery's refusal to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage was not discriminatory. The judgement is well worth reading. Note the the 90th and final paragraph of the judgement, worth quoting in full:

90. In summary, what occurred was an error in the proper conduct of the proceedings, which can now be seen to have precluded the Court of Appeal from deciding the case on a correct basis and from reaching the right outcome. Such an error takes the case outside any provision that ďthe decision of the Court of Appeal on any case stated under this article shall be finalĒ. An appeal is therefore competent to the Supreme Court against all aspects of the Court of Appealís judgment, including its decision in respect of sexual discrimination under SORs as well as its decision in respect of political opinion or religious belief under FETO. The appellants should be given permission to appeal accordingly in the light of the undoubted importance of the substantive issues; and, in the light of my conclusions on the substantive issues, the Supreme Court can and should allow the appeal in respect of both SORs and FETO.

So it may not necessarily be the last word...

Coming back to the still, for the moment, United States, I note that: The Communist Control Act (68 Stat. 775, 50 U.S.C. 841-844), signed into law by President Dwight Eisenhower on 24 August 1954, outlaws the Communist Party of the United States and criminalizes membership in, or support for the Party or "Communist-action" organizations and defines evidence to be considered by a jury in determining participation in the activities, planning, actions, objectives, or purposes of such organizations.

In 1973, a federal district court in Arizona decided that the act was unconstitutional and Arizona could not keep the party off the ballot in the 1972 general election (Blawis v. Bolin). In 1961, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the act did not bar the party from participating in New York's unemployment insurance system (Communist Party v. Catherwood) - However, the Supreme Court of the United States has not ruled on the act's constitutionality. Despite that, no administration has tried to enforce it. The provisions of the act outlawing the party have not been repealed. Nevertheless, the Communist Party USA continues to exist in the 21st century.

Thus, a cake shop that was asked to produce a Hammer & Sickle cake for a local Communist jamboree could refuse, on the firm grounds that to do so would be a criminal offence..

In a similar vein, the American Nazi Party (ANP) and the National Socialist Movement (NSM) a neo-Nazi political party based in Detroit, Michigan and part of the Nationalist Front, is not illegal in the United States (though it is in many countries). The public display of Nazi flags is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution which guarantees the right to freedom of speech.

Thus, a cake shop that refused to make a Swastika cake are likely to lose in a local Court and I doubt if the USSC would hear it. It would be more more interesting if the owners of the cake shop were Jewish, then it might well reach the USSC.

Interesting stuff the Law.

Mac
Mac the Knife is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 21:34
  #16162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,475
Originally Posted by Toadstool View Post
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018...ecision-latest

OB

Looks like the USSC ruled in favour of the cake shop who refused to make a cake for a gay couple's wedding. It was ruled in favour of the gay couple all the way to the USSC who overturned the decisions of the previous courts.



There may be hope for Arlene's Flowers.

We have had the same here.

The Christian owners of a Northern Ireland bakery have won their appeal in the so-called "gay cake" discrimination case.

The UK's highest court ruled that Ashers bakery's refusal to make a cake with a slogan supporting same-sex marriage was not discriminatory.

The five justices on the Supreme Court were unanimous in their judgement.

Unless there was supplemental rulings on some of the tangents of the case, the USSC ruling in favor of the Colorado baker was from this past summer. Iíll be interested to review the NI case to see what parallels existed in the case.
West Coast is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2018, 21:40
  #16163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 3,475
Thus, a cake shop that refused to make a Swastika cake are likely to lose in a local Court and I doubt if the USSC would hear it. It would be more more interesting if the owners of the cake shop were Jewish, then it might well reach the USSC.

I would tend to agree on the basis of precedent from the Colorado baker case.
West Coast is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 03:30
  #16164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 92
The CO baker case is not as cut and dried as it seems. In fact, it is rather stilted in its limited ruling. The court made no mention of the central theme of the case concerning the baker's requirement under CO law to bake the nasty cake. The ruling actually was an admonishment(rather harsh) that the CO state authority treated the baker shabbily and discriminated against him personally. The case was returned to CO, where it will go through the process again, and the state will once again rule for the gay guys who wanted the nasty cake made. However - I think that this time the CO state authorities who write the decision will be more circumspect in how they word the ruling, and give the baker due deference to his philosophical position as a man of faith.

I suspect he will still lose at the state level, and will be required to treat everyone equally in terms of baking for commission(as instructed, not artistic expression). The same arguments may again make it to SCOTUS where they will try to find a loophole again to fail to settle this nebulous area of civil law.
ethicalconundrum is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 08:13
  #16165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,560
I was in the States (New York City, actually) when Kavanaugh was confirmed. The world did not end then and there, which I found a bit odd, but there you are ....

So now we have moved on to this notion that privately held religious beliefs may be grounds for discrimination in the provision of certain services to the general public. It's sure provocative to order a cake for a gay wedding from a baker who's dead set against gays, but it's arguable that the baker should not discriminate against anyone.

I find it interesting, revealing, that our doughty EC thinks a gay cake (Can a cake have a sexual orientation?) is "nasty." Such a twee little word of denunciation, that. Nasty or not, a gay cake from a non-involved baker is not quite the same thing as a Nazi cake ordered from a Jewish baker, is it?

I look forward to a fresh test case where some bigot orders a cake from a diesel dyke baker reading "Get back in the kitchen where you belong, bitch!"

Moving right along, are we going to see some hyper-religious bus driver kicking pax off his bus who do not conform to his notions of what is right or wrong in terms of sexuality? How about a waiter who's read his Bible very closely, a little too closely, so that he won't serve blacks, whom he takes for inferior people unfit for polite company, in his section of the restaurant, or a pilot who won't allow Jews, Christ-killers, on his flight?

I think we might want to move right along to making it so that a cake is just a cake, no matter what it's for or what it reads, so that if you want to get all precious about making any old cake for any old member of the general public, then get out of the cake-making business.

In practical terms, to order a cake from someone who's a bit of a hater? Who knows what might go into such a cake? Mmm, good ... angel food, with just a hint of garlic ....
chuks is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 15:36
  #16166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 92
Relax Chukster. 'Nasty cake' is just an expression I made up for utility. I don't care one way or the other on this. Frankly, I would prefer that it be settled at the county courthouse, and never make it to the state, much less our SCOTUS. Sadly for me, the state, and now the feds just have to get their noses involved here, so we will spend millions on deciding which persons protected rights trump which other persons protected rights. My only hope now is that they will get busy, finish it and move on to more pressing problems.

sigh,,,,
ethicalconundrum is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 17:04
  #16167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,560
Well, EC, calling a gay cake "nasty" is a way of taking a stance against all this now-fashionable LGBTQI stuff.

When we were in Manhattan recently I was chatting with a young Bahamian on the Subway, Underground, or Tube, when he said that he never knew before that today's general term of "Christopher Street" originally referred to the actual Christopher Street in Manhattan's Greenwich Village and events at its Stonewall Inn. (The cops had raided the joint early in the morning of 28 June 1969 but found themselves greatly outnumbered by 500 to 600 angry homos, lesbos, trannies, you name it and there must have been at least one of each sort, who all chose to fight back, when this was something that New York City cops had never had to face before. History was made that night.)

I'm cisgender, to use the now-fashionable term, but I do have a few perverted friends, and if they want to make legal trouble over the right to order a wedding cake with two guys, or two womyn, or even some guy from Daesh and his goat topping it then I think they should be able to do that.
chuks is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 18:07
  #16168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 92
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
Well, EC, calling a gay cake "nasty" is a way of taking a stance against all this now-fashionable LGBTQI stuff.

.
If you've been micro-aggressed(or even macro) I guess you should do something or see someone about that. It was as accurate a description of what the gay couple wanted on their cake without getting graphic. Now you've managed to deflect this discussion away from the politics of the new supremes and onto a completely meaningless track. Oye vey
ethicalconundrum is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2018, 20:22
  #16169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,560
Oy, vey ist mir!

EC, you had stated your opinion, indirectly, about gay cakes, and I just stated mine a bit more directly.

There's no need to kvetch about this, bubbeleh.
chuks is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 00:02
  #16170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 591
Well, you Trump haters here get to gloat today.

Trump exhibited one of his character flaws for sure -- allowing a complete moron and a-hole Kanye West to sit in his office and spout complete BS.

That must be the reason for the drop in the stock market.
obgraham is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 01:13
  #16171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 961
A complete moron and a-hole sitting in the Oval Office and spouting complete BS?

Where's the news? That's been occuring every day for 21 months.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 01:43
  #16172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,560
OB, you were okay with yer man recently telling a bemused world that he and the Kimster had "fallen in love," so that only with this fresh love affair, between Trump and Kanye West, have you got the vague notion that Trump simply does not tick right.

There is this increasingly open display of Trump's naked need for flattery that probably should worry you and the rest of his partisans. He's always been a bit unhinged, but now the damned lid has blown clean off, exposing the inner workings of what passes for Trump's mind. Never mind inviting such a complete fool as Kanye West to the White House, supposedly to discuss high-level matters to do with the welfare of our Black citizenry, though.

The only obvious reasons for that invitation are that West is Black, and he seems to like Trump, pr perhaps just wearing that stupid red hat. If Trump thinks that West is somehow a sort of thought-leader for US Blacks, though ... that has to be delusional. One invitation to the White House and Trump suddenly zooms to the top of the charts with Black voters? Donald, they are Black, not retarded! Some of them are stupid, Blacks such as Kanye West, sure, but not enough of them to make them fall for either you or Kanye to such a great degree as all that; it was not worth throwing the dignity of an invitation to the White House overboard.

On the other hand, does Kanye West have nukes? Probably not, otherwise one of these rapper feuds would have seen some 'hood or other turned into a glowing pit. Forget Trump going all smoochy with West if you suddenly need to be worried and disgusted by Trump, OB. Think about this crazy back-and-forth play that Trump and Kim are acting out, one week literal lovers (according to Trump, at least), the next week sworn enemies again.

In all of this we see how shallow the mind of Donald Trump is, as he chases after love, praise, and, of course, votes.

Let Hannity tell Trump that people want to see him getting tough on Kim and perhaps Kim suddenly is told, by half-literate tweet of course, that she's just not good enough for Kanye. Oops, wrong Kim!
chuks is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 04:25
  #16173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 591
Well Chukky, Trump did come from the world of reality TV, so that is likely why he likes Kanye. So Iíll give him that one.

Meanwhile, tomorrow Kanye will still be an a-hole
Trump can get back to improving the economy and saving the world,
And you lot can still kvetch on about him. Get back to me on November 7.
obgraham is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 04:31
  #16174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,963
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
OB, you were okay with yer man recently telling a bemused world that he and the Kimster had "fallen in love," so that only with this fresh love affair, between Trump and Kanye West, have you got the vague notion that Trump simply does not tick right.
We already know exactly why the Trumpettes have so rapidly Ďadvanced to the rearí on Dear Leader Kim..



If Fox says itís okay to be hypocrites, itís okay to be hypocrites. In fact, any one who says hypocrisy should be considered amoral is just parotting #FakeNews CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS propaganda
Hempy is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 08:08
  #16175 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 65
Posts: 225
How's the "trade war" with China coming along. Any reduction in the chinese surplus? Or?
Per
Ancient Mariner is online now  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 09:48
  #16176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: apogee
Age: 64
Posts: 59
Somewhat disconcerting to have a self-confessed mother-f***er crap rapper spouting forth in a White House converted sound stage room as Donald smiles along.
meadowrun is online now  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 10:37
  #16177 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not where I want to be
Age: 65
Posts: 225
It was in the US the crap rap was invented, now you suffer.
Truth be told, so do we.
Per
Ancient Mariner is online now  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 11:03
  #16178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,560
What are you, some kind of masochist, listening to rap? I do not think that I have ever consciously heard anything by Kanye West. Of course I know who he is, along with his wife and her crew, but that's about it. Even some guy living in a cave in Afghanistan probably knows who Kanye West is, and that his wife has an absolutely enormous butt and lips that look as if they have been inflated.

I am just hunkered down waiting for this stuff to run its course, same as disco did. Listening to the Bee Gees ... my God! I use "Stayin' Alive" as the t tempo for CPR, but that is about it. (Funny enough, my wife and our friends dragged me to a performance by "The Italian Bee Gees." This family of wops had all the songs down perfect, and they seemed to have a sincere regard for both the art and the history of the originals; it was a bit touching, although the music still sucked.
chuks is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 12:55
  #16179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Vendee
Posts: 138
Yet I now read that Fox News (sic) is touting Mr. West's visit and his profane and vulgar outbursts as authentic expressions and an authentic voice of today...whatever the blazes that is supposed to mean. Of course I have no desire to see the video, but I understand it to be an unhinged ten minute stream of consciousness download.

This is your man. This is,seemingly, what many want to be. If not, thenwhy the Fox imprimatur of approval.

Last edited by Uncle Fred; 12th Oct 2018 at 15:06.
Uncle Fred is online now  
Old 12th Oct 2018, 15:08
  #16180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 591
Iíll accept West as symbolic of my side of the spectrum when you lot accept Mad Maxine and Alec Baldwin as your standard bearers.
obgraham is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.