Dicks and Walmart getting sued HAHA

Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer. A retailer is distributing a ready made product, sold commercially on the open market. Wal-Mart, nor Dicks, are being asked to create anything. If the queers wanted to buy a ready made cake offered by the bakery; they might have a legit claim. But no law should force anyone to create an artistic work. That would be like forcing a child photographer to take pictures of you fucking your wife...

No the baker is not an 'artist' in any relevant sense.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...420060cb7bd_story.html?utm_term=.aad35c23c783
PORTLAND, Ore. — An Oregon man filed suits Monday claiming Dick’s Sporting Goods and Walmart discriminated against the 20-year-old when they refused to sell him a rifle.

Dick’s and Walmart restricted gun sales to adults 21 and older in the wake of the Florida high school massacre. The 19-year-old accused in the school slaying bought the AR-15 used in the attack legally.

Oregon law allows residents to buy shotguns or rifles starting at age 18.

Watson is asking judges to force Dick’s and Walmart “to stop unlawfully discriminating against 18, 19, and 20 year-old customers at all Oregon locations.” Additionally, he is asking for unspecified punitive damages.
-----------

2015 ORS 659A.403¹
Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.
Looks like those fascist PA laws are coming back to haunt some people :badgrin:

So if the conservative nuts on this forum had any intellectual honesty and consisitency,

they would be supporting Dick's and Walmart,

since the RW consensus on this forum at least is that a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

oops.
I do think businesses should be able to refuse to do business with anyone they choose, but liberals think other wise. So until you quit cherry picking who businesses can refuse business with. Sell the gun.
 
since its been a long time since I was 25 I really don't know, but I do remember seeing something about higher rates and mandatory insurance for those under 25 on the Hertz website. I'm sure someone on here knows the facts, if so, please post.

Almost all insurance companies charge more for drivers under the age of 25.
This makes the issue a matter of cost in providing the service.

They are not denying the people under the age of 25 the ability to use their service.
They are requiring them to foot the additional cost the service requires.
You are not required to take out insurance with rental cars?? You can use your own insurance for your own car, if your own car is not being used while renting a car.....

And many states it has nothing to do with insurance, they just will not rent it to you, period.....when under a certain age...... even if you legally are driving age and with a State drivers license.....?
They actually can be used to protect the young, as in cases where some car rental companies wouldn't rent to anyone under 25.
Is there a law in Oregon that makes it illegal to rent a car to someone under 25?
If there is not, then maybe Dicks has a fighting chance???

Do age discrimination laws only cover 18 and older??? And not 17 or younger?
You dont seem to understand the situation very well
How so??? If rental car businesses can legally refuse to rent to those under 25 why can't Dicks do the same?

Car rental companies have to rent to someone under 25, the person renting needs to pay for the extra cost of the insurance. They are not allowed to discriminate based on age.
I was denied a car rental when under 21.....this was long ago, and paying higher insurance price was not an option.....

Maybe states are different?

So you are saying if the driving age is 16 in the state, the car rentals have to rent to them???

16 year olds can’t enter into a legal contract.

OMG don't let my Eastern European mail order fiancée hear that.

lol
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...420060cb7bd_story.html?utm_term=.aad35c23c783
PORTLAND, Ore. — An Oregon man filed suits Monday claiming Dick’s Sporting Goods and Walmart discriminated against the 20-year-old when they refused to sell him a rifle.

Dick’s and Walmart restricted gun sales to adults 21 and older in the wake of the Florida high school massacre. The 19-year-old accused in the school slaying bought the AR-15 used in the attack legally.

Oregon law allows residents to buy shotguns or rifles starting at age 18.

Watson is asking judges to force Dick’s and Walmart “to stop unlawfully discriminating against 18, 19, and 20 year-old customers at all Oregon locations.” Additionally, he is asking for unspecified punitive damages.
-----------

2015 ORS 659A.403¹
Discrimination in place of public accommodation prohibited

Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any place of public accommodation, without any distinction, discrimination or restriction on account of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status or age if the individual is of age, as described in this section, or older.
Looks like those fascist PA laws are coming back to haunt some people :badgrin:

So if the conservative nuts on this forum had any intellectual honesty and consisitency,

they would be supporting Dick's and Walmart,

since the RW consensus on this forum at least is that a business should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.

oops.
I do think businesses should be able to refuse to do business with anyone they choose, but liberals think other wise. So until you quit cherry picking who businesses can refuse business with. Sell the gun.

I didn't do any such thing. WTF is wrong with you?
 
Since Dick's isn't the only place selling guns, why did he go there? Is this another bake-a-cake suit? Who won that one?

Not the baker
Those fascist republicans forcing those bakers to make the cake :oops:

Nope, but the fascist republicans will force someone to sell them a gun. If it is wrong for the baker it is wrong for Dicks.

Everytime the "right" uses the tactics of the left they push the country left even faster than before.

The country never was left. There were small pockets of leftists and the president at the time thinking otherwise.

Knock Knock! Reality's crashing the party!

I read post like this and wonder what country you live in. The United States is rushing headlong to the left and the people on the “right” are making sure we get there even faster


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
 
Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer. A retailer is distributing a ready made product, sold commercially on the open market. Wal-Mart, nor Dicks, are being asked to create anything. If the queers wanted to buy a ready made cake offered by the bakery; they might have a legit claim. But no law should force anyone to create an artistic work. That would be like forcing a child photographer to take pictures of you fucking your wife...

No the baker is not an 'artist' in any relevant sense.
Yes they are. Whether you like it or not. Crafting is an art. But go ahead and amuse me... Show me how a baker isn't an artist...
 
Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer. A retailer is distributing a ready made product, sold commercially on the open market. Wal-Mart, nor Dicks, are being asked to create anything. If the queers wanted to buy a ready made cake offered by the bakery; they might have a legit claim. But no law should force anyone to create an artistic work. That would be like forcing a child photographer to take pictures of you fucking your wife...

No the baker is not an 'artist' in any relevant sense.

So you wouldn't have a problem whipping one of these out by next Friday?

upload_2018-3-6_9-23-7.png
 
You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer. A retailer is distributing a ready made product, sold commercially on the open market. Wal-Mart, nor Dicks, are being asked to create anything. If the queers wanted to buy a ready made cake offered by the bakery; they might have a legit claim. But no law should force anyone to create an artistic work. That would be like forcing a child photographer to take pictures of you fucking your wife...

No the baker is not an 'artist' in any relevant sense.
Yes they are. Whether you like it or not. Crafting is an art. But go ahead and amuse me... Show me how a baker isn't an artist...

For starters...

The Oregon bakery case was precipitated by the sellers refusing to do business with the customers simply because they were gay,

not because of any artwork issues.
 
You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer. A retailer is distributing a ready made product, sold commercially on the open market. Wal-Mart, nor Dicks, are being asked to create anything. If the queers wanted to buy a ready made cake offered by the bakery; they might have a legit claim. But no law should force anyone to create an artistic work. That would be like forcing a child photographer to take pictures of you fucking your wife...

No the baker is not an 'artist' in any relevant sense.

So you wouldn't have a problem whipping one of these out by next Friday?

View attachment 180724

Is that for a gay couple?
 
And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer. A retailer is distributing a ready made product, sold commercially on the open market. Wal-Mart, nor Dicks, are being asked to create anything. If the queers wanted to buy a ready made cake offered by the bakery; they might have a legit claim. But no law should force anyone to create an artistic work. That would be like forcing a child photographer to take pictures of you fucking your wife...

No the baker is not an 'artist' in any relevant sense.
Yes they are. Whether you like it or not. Crafting is an art. But go ahead and amuse me... Show me how a baker isn't an artist...

For starters...

The Oregon bakery case was precipitated by the sellers refusing to do business with the customers simply because they were gay,

not because of any artwork issues.

They did not refuse point of sale services, they didn't want to provide a cake for a same sex wedding, something they found to be morally objectionable based on their religion.
 
Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer.

That's incorrect. The gay couple didn't ask the baker to create a unique cake, they simply ordered a cake that the baker already makes, they didn't ask for anything additional or creative. Basically, they ordered a product.
 
Republicans should just change their name to the Socialist Party of America now that they want to tell private businesses what to do.

You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer.

That's incorrect. The gay couple didn't ask the baker to create a unique cake, they simply ordered a cake that the baker already makes, they didn't ask for anything additional or creative. Basically, they ordered a product.

Contracted, not point of sale.

PA law shouldn't apply in this narrow case.
 
You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer.

That's incorrect. The gay couple didn't ask the baker to create a unique cake, they simply ordered a cake that the baker already makes, they didn't ask for anything additional or creative. Basically, they ordered a product.

Contracted, not point of sale.

PA law shouldn't apply in this narrow case.

What does 'contracted. not point of sale' have to do with anything?
 
And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer. A retailer is distributing a ready made product, sold commercially on the open market. Wal-Mart, nor Dicks, are being asked to create anything. If the queers wanted to buy a ready made cake offered by the bakery; they might have a legit claim. But no law should force anyone to create an artistic work. That would be like forcing a child photographer to take pictures of you fucking your wife...

No the baker is not an 'artist' in any relevant sense.
Yes they are. Whether you like it or not. Crafting is an art. But go ahead and amuse me... Show me how a baker isn't an artist...

For starters...

The Oregon bakery case was precipitated by the sellers refusing to do business with the customers simply because they were gay,

not because of any artwork issues.
Inspiration is a fickle thing. Especially in the art world...
 
You got your cake didnt you?

And where did you stand on that issue?


a better question is where to you stand on it? Can bakeries discriminate if Walmart can discriminate?
The difference is that a baker is an artist, and as such has to craft the item desired by the customer.

That's incorrect. The gay couple didn't ask the baker to create a unique cake, they simply ordered a cake that the baker already makes, they didn't ask for anything additional or creative. Basically, they ordered a product.

Contracted, not point of sale.

PA law shouldn't apply in this narrow case.

So if a gay person orders a Whopper at BK, they have to sell it to him, but if a gay person orders a Whopper without cheese,

BK can refuse because they don't do special orders for gays?

lol
 
`
Tyler Watson’s lawsuits filed against the retailers in two separate counties claim he faced age discrimination from Dick’s and Walmart, The Oregonian/OregonLive reported . The lawsuit is believed to be the first filed over the new gun policies enacted on Feb. 28.

Watson is filing this suit in state court, which means his lawyers want this adjudicated according to Oregon's state constitution. It also means its not a federal issue. He is alleging that both companies violated state age discrimination law. At issue isn't the guns, It's store age policy VS an Oregon law at "allows" stores to sell guns to anyone who is 18 and above. I just don't see Watson winning but perhaps maybe that's not what he's really after.
`
 

Forum List

Back
Top