Joey Vento Is Right, This Is America, Speak English

actually what's totally wrong is that no form of english is any indiginous languege of the western hemisphere, certainly not of any place in america.

=^^=
.../\...

 

Astute? Racisim? Have you lost your mind lady? If you THINK this is a form of racisim you need help...

 

i was actually refering to shop owners all over the world not just in amarica! in qubec they speak french if you order a sandwich in qubec its up to the costemer to communicate what you want not the outher way around! peace!

 

most of you have missed the point. the point is not whether or not he was morally wrong, which is arguable either way and a matter of opinion. the point is the government doesnt have and shouldnt have any right to force your opinion of morality onto him. our democracy is set up to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority. this not only includes ethnic or racial minorities but minorities of opinion(opinions that differ from the majority). if the government is allowed to infringe HIS right to speak his mind simply because it offends a group of people, then they can also take away YOUR right to protest the war on the basis that it offends the military, and thousands of other similar situations would arise. if you infringe the rights of one, you threaten the rights of all. this is why laws shouldnt be made based on opinion, to protect the very minorities that you claim are being offended.

as to whether or not he was discriminating, i can see how you could make that argument if the sign read "no non english speakers allowed" or "no blacks", but it simply said to order in english. it makes sense since a majority of people speak english in america and if someone ordered in a foreign language the restaurant employees would most likely not be able to understand them. america is a melting pot for many cultures and languages, so should we be required to learn them all? if someone orders in swahili, should they be required to learn that language? its a matter of practicality really.
where do some of you get the idea that america is some kind of world community property where people can go to to make their fortunes but not have to assimilate into our culture or learn our language. we may be a young nation, but we are a sovereign nation with a common history and language. a nation not bound together by a common culture and language cannot stand together. buildings and bridges cant be built if the crew doesnt speak a common language. when you go to a foreign country should you expect everyone there to speak your language as well?
.

 

"where do some of you get the idea that america is some kind of world community property where people can go to to make their fortunes but not have to assimilate into our culture or learn our language. we may be a young nation, but we are a sovereign nation with a common history and language. a nation not bound together by a common culture and language cannot stand together. buildings and bridges cant be built if the crew doesnt speak a common language. when you go to a foreign country should you expect everyone there to speak your language as well?"


Thank You!!! These are the words I was looking for but couldnt find.

 

200 plus years of this being the language spoken here counts for nothing??

 

Heh. The last time I was in Quebec was January 4th, 2008. I've met thousands of 'Latinos' or Spanish speakers. I've made solid friendships with Mexicans who have lived at my home, gone to school with, and worked with.

A consensus released just this week here in Canada, confirmed that 1 in 6 Canadians is identified as an ethnic minority. We live in a Global Village, so business people should get used to it. Thing is, this man owns one the most popular restaurant and tourist attractions in Philly, yet he's got a chip on his shoulder that people who come to his restaurant should all speak English. It's awfully back-asswards of him to assume that his restaurant will only serve English speakers who can accurately pronounce the orders they are making.

Have you ever been to Philly? I have. This restaurant is located directly beside a popular Mexican restaurant and across from another leading Cheesesteak place competitor called Pat's Cheesesteaks.

I'm not surprised that some people/foreigners were offended by his particular sign. Also, this man enjoys stirring the pot and getting publicity about his restaurant. He's no stranger to the competition across the road and he enjoys making shrines to dead white police officers.

I read that he would mix people's orders up on purpose in newspaper articles about him, and on the net. You can check out a wikipedia page that describes his behaviour if you doubt that he intentionally wrecked people's orders who were having a hard time speaking English:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geno%27s_Steaks

 

*shrugs*

I think instead of putting up a sign that says that all of his customers should speak English because it's America, he could have simply asked people to repeat themselves, or better yet, make a sign that reads:

"Please order in English. Our staff cannot complete your order any other way."

And he should have left racial/ethnic connotations out of his sign. His sign implies that foreigners and newcomers to America don't deserve to be served at his restaurant if they can't speak English.

 

The sign could have been a little more polite but the point stands.

 

What point?

That it's okay to offend and insult a targeted group of people because you can bark out the First Amendment?

 

But who were the people/foreigners he offended? Do you have their names at hand? According to Vento, he had the sign up for nine months without incident or outcry. It wasn't until a long-time customer/acquaintance of Vento, who just so happens to be a city councilman, decided to take issue with the sign for political reasons.

Here is a segment with Vento taken from Lou Dobbs, where he explains how this all came about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AsmN1eJXGc

I am not going to condone or condemn Vento's views, because that is not the issue.

 

LOL. I love Philly.



I would be offended. People have the right to be offended, and they were when there was a big uprising and bruhahaha in the editorials and newspapers about "illegal immigrants" trying to order food in their own language - which wasn't really happening as often as you are made to believe.

He says that he put it up as a political statement. He's no stranger to controversy and publicity stunts. Why should council members not give him any guff when they received complaints? Maybe the council member himself went down to investigate and check for himself the signs he had put up.

Can you actually sit there Matty, and say that nobody was offended by his sign? Maybe you can't realize that it was an issue in the papers awhile back in Philly. And no, I can't name anyone by name - except myself and a couple friends. I know a handful of people living in Philly and that's it.

 

There's a lot of things in life that offend people. That's life. There's things that offend everyone. Most people learn to grow up and get over it. I would rather live in a naturally imperfect society where people are offended, versus an artificially perfect Brave New World where everyone is made to be "politically correct" by Big Brother. That's why I shun collectivism. Political correctness is all about collectivism and creating a perfectly uniform society where everyone obeys the state and does exactly as they're told by their masters... or else.

 

Yeah, but by making English the uniform language everywhere in America, it is a collective and it is the state breaking down the cultures of people and telling them as their masters that it should be that way.

This man put up his sign for a political purpose, so he says. It was a political message that Americans should speak English - of which I believe the state should fight to defend other dying language against this very attitude and notion.

This has nothing to do with Big Brother and braving the new world. It's unfair to pretend that Mr. Vento had no idea that his sign was going to offend people of a specific group and then say that it's "just life" and natural for those who are a target to be offended. That's just the pot calling the kettle black. This is an issue of how to interpret and analyze the law.

 

Aristartle, if you think the sign was offensive, you have the right to boycott his restaurant. The government, however has no right to force this man to take the sign out of his shop. If you take away his right to make a political statement,whether offensive or not, what do you think is going to happen to your rights to make political statements about other topics, such as speaking out against the war, or expresiing your opinion about other controversial topics? These things all offend some people, but we cant legislate based on peoples sensitivities. Like i said before, if you infringe the rights of one, you threaten the rights of all.

 

Who's making English the "uniform language"? I don't even see how this fits into what is being discussed. The state certainly isn't pushing for English only. No, it's the state and its interlocking corporate interests that are pushing multiculturalism and political correctness as a way to balkanize the population.

This has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Vento's beliefs or his views. Once again, what is being discussed here is Vento's right to put a sign up in his own business, which he pays taxes on, without being told what to do by the government. You keep diverting off the subject and start focusing on Vento's beliefs and whether he's offending people, which has nothing to do with this discussion.

Please rephrase that. It's not making any sense.

I think it has quite a lot to do with Big Brother when you advocate the state dictating what signs people can and cannot put up in their own businesses. Whether Vento knew he was going to offend people is not the point. There is nothing in the First Amendment that says anything about offending people.

This is a pretty simple concept to grasp.

 

LOL.

I didn't suggest that we legislate to solve all our problems. I have faith in the courts to determine the intentions of existing laws and to interpret them accordingly.

I don't believe 100% Free Speech is a concept that is A) functional, B) ideal, or C) embedded in the First Amendment with the intent of being used as a tool for people to say whatever they want, whenever they want to whoever they want in any circumstance.

It's abusive language that he used in the sign in my opinion.

And I'm not diverting the subject by explaining that the message behind his opinions and language is a threat or an offense to people of a specific group. That's not hijacking the discussion - and it does involve his right to say what he expresses.

I don't advocate the state dictate what signs people can put up - I advocate that the law 'decide' what is considered offensive or what is deemed to incite and persecute a group of people. It's the interpretation of the law that I disagree with, foremost with the First Amendment in this particular case. The First Amendment was like, written in the 1700s, so I'm not going to argue with you Matt what wasn't covered in the First Amendment in the American Constitution.

There is something in the Constitution about offending people, and the government has every right to force this man to take down his sign. Why is that hard to understand? The government already says what the man can't sell in his restaurant (no drugs, no BBQ'd Siberian Tiger steaks), how he has to run his restaurants (health standards, profit documentation and tax info, employee benefits and minimum wage standards, etc) and how he promotes and markets his business (compliance regulations, privacy protection).

The government is the only body that can legally execute force on people - and the government has every right to legally take rights away.

It's the interpretation of the law or what people perceive "Free Speech" to be and entail that I disagree with in this case, and I thought that I'd made that pretty clear.

 

Where? Article and section, please.

Well, apparently they don't. That's why Vento won his case.

 

Article 3, Section 1 & 2.

I believe the interpretation of the law to be wrong. I don't think Free Speech was created to be used for people to say whatever they want, whenever they want in whatever circumstance. I don't agree with the decision and interpretation of the law, so please, stop accussing me of wanting to resurrect Stalin or reading too many Huxley books.

 

well you have just offended me and what i beleive and stand for!!!! how! dare! you! you need to be prosecuted for hate crimes! how dare you suggest that i might be racist!!!!!!!!! how dare you say i should order my food in english! why dont you speak swahieli??? were in south philly! and you dont speek enough english to order a sandwitch! what the fuck has the world come too!!!! id like to heare your expiriance in an old fashion newyork deli!!!! if you cant order a sandwitch, come after the rush! ok! peace!