Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Daniel Squadron: On Why Orthodox Jews Should Vote For Him

Daniel Squadron's latest flier.
בהסכמת "הרעבנים" "ועסקנים" דוויליאמסברג

check list on why NOT to vote for Daniel Squadron
 ✓has 100% approval rating by the biggest abortion on demand orginazation
one of the major pushers of same gender "marriage"
✓the leading sponsor of genda (This could force sefariem stores to hire men with skirts, and would allow men in to woman's bathrooms)
✓wants to make NY have more abortions (41% is to low)
✓has the endorsement of 3 leading gay orginazations

See How Societies Acceptance Of Homosexuality Effected Even The Most Insular Chasdish Woman!

Library Book that helped convince a "Chasidish" woman she was a lesbian

 It's true. I have ten children and I've been married for twenty-five years. I went to the most chassidish schools. I got married when I was sixteen. Growing up, we spoke Yiddish. My children and my grandchildren all speak Yiddish. Just from looking, maybe you couldn't tell that I am gay. I would be invisible, and not just because of the way I dress or because of any of those things. I would be invisible because I am not out to almost anyone. I look like all the other bubbies and mommies on my block.

It's just too scary for me. I am afraid. I have too much to lose.

I am terrified that someone might hear me talking on my phone one day, or somehow, just from looking into my eyes, know what I am thinking.

I went to a library, not one near my house, but in the city. It's not allowed to read goyishe books. I said I was going to the women's doctor. The office is right nearby. I sat all the way in the back of the library, down low, between the shelves, and I had there a little pile of books about being gay. I put my purse on top of the books, so if someone went past, they wouldn't see. In the bathroom, I changed the way I cover my hair, so no one would see me and know what kind of person I am, where I live, who my Rebbe is, and tell on me.

When I opened the first book the librarian gave me, there was a photograph of something I had never seen before.* I didn't even know how to look at the picture. I couldn't understand it. I read the words and I didn't understand those either. I felt like I was stupid. I felt like I lived in a foreign country. I began to sweat with terrible fear and I looked all around me but no one was there. No one was looking. But I thought someone was looking, so I got up and I went to the bathroom and I hid in the stall for maybe a half hour. I felt like the worst kind of pervert. I think I cried. I did cry.

When I went back to the place I had been sitting, the librarian had already put the books away. I thought that G-d was making it harder for me to do a sin. He was giving me a chance to change my mind. So I thought about it and decided that I would only take one book to look at, not a pile. But then I thought about the pictures in the book. Even the cover made my face burn.

If someone saw me there, without even reading books like that, I could have lost my kids. I could have been kicked out of my community. My mother and father would have sat shiva. They still might sit shiva. I still might be kicked out of the community. I still might lose my kids. Why am I doing this interview? It's dangerous. I should stop. But once you open your mouth, it's hard to close it again.

When we were first married, I had to go to Manhattan, to bring a document to where my husband worked, and he didn't want me to be seen by the other men there, so he came outside. There were two women there, in the doorway, touching each other, kissing, and I looked away but looked back again. I couldn't help it. My man said not to look because they are gay. I didn't know what that meant. But it made me feel funny inside myself. I wanted to do what they were doing, I wanted to be them. They looked happy. But I thought it was probably a bad thing, a goyishe thing. But still, I said to my husband,  "I think I am like those people."I didn't know anything about gay at all. It bothered my husband. He said something about looking at dogs when they are doing things, that it makes your children like dogs too. Even when he walks in the street, he doesn't look up. He doesn't look at me, or anyone else either.

I don't even know, for sure, if I am gay. I think I am, but I've never been with a woman. But I like women, I feel more comfortable with women, and I don't know so many men. My father is a good man. He is a refined man. He makes the cholent for my mother before shabbos and he bakes the challah too. He's never raised a hand to us. He wouldn't hurt anybody. But everything he does, he asks a sha'alah. He wouldn't be happy if I ever came out. He would die.

My mother is from Europe. She sits and peels vegetables and says tehillim from memory all day long. She doesn't have fancy jewelry or anything fancy at all in the house. She raised me to be like her, not to be any other way. When she lights the shabbos licht, she prays that all her children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren are yirei shomayim. And what would she think, if I told her I am gay? I'm not even sure my mother knows what gay is. I can't imagine explaining it to her. We don't ever talk about those kind of things. I might kill my own father and mother, chas vecholilah, if I said I am gay.

So why say anything? Why do anything at all? I am already not so young. When I was younger, a girl, I felt like I was connected to many other girls and I could talk and I could be myself with them, relaxed and...I don't know how to explain it. It wasn't such a big thing, a touch, a word.  I didn't know I wouldn't feel so friendly when I got married. I thought getting married, it's supposed to be even better. But for me, even though my husband is a good man, a holy Jew and a baal chesed, it isn't better. He says it's not right for men and women to be close. My husband doesn't use my name. He calls me "di mame" in front of the children and nothing at all in private. It's not very Jewish of me, but I sometimes think I'd like someone to love me and touch me, just because. It's so lonely.
(* The book was The Whole Lesbian Sex Book)
(from a "orthodox" toeavah website)

If not for the fact that society accepted toevah she never would have had these problems!  Every single person who voted for toevah candidates has a chelek in this and the thousands of other peoples averas!

please show this article to rabbi David Niederman, and his Aroni counterparts (also for Skvere and Kiryas Joel) .

please also show this article to as many Rabbaniem, Poskiem, Roshei Yeshivas, Rebbes etc. , and even some half way decent askaniem  as possible!

Monday, September 23, 2013

NY Post Write Editorial Supporting A Culture Of Death (Euthanasia)

Our aging crisis: the need for a dignified death

In his final published work, “Mortality,” written while succumbing to esophageal cancer, Christopher Hitchens a athiest captures in one sentence the unavoidable "truth" of the dying process: “I don’t have a body, I am a body.”

No one understands this "truism" quite as well as journalist Katy Butler, who witnessed the prolonged process of dying that her once-formidable, war-veteran father underwent after suffering a stroke in 2001, devolving into dementia and then finally dying from pneumonia seven years later.

As doctors pushed life-support surgeries, new medications and cutting-edge interventions, Butler and her mother didn’t pray for a cure.

Instead, they wished for his death, all of which is chronicled in her troubling investigative memoir “Knocking on Heaven’s Door.”

The “end-of-life crisis,” or as Butler calls it “the caregiver crisis,” has hit epidemic levels as the number of Americans over 85 doubled to 6 million since 1990.

Baby boomers, like Butler, must now wrangle with what to do with sick elderly parents, asking questions of themselves they probably thought would never be fathomable: What can be done when a person lives too long? And has science gone too far in its mission to ward off death?

Through her experiences with her father, Butler is unwavering in her answers.

“Our optimistic science-worshiping culture wants to medicalize aging and make it nothing more than a collection of specific diseases that medicine can prevent or fix,” she writes. “But no matter what deal we make with the devil, nature outwits us. Dying can be postponed, but aging cannot be cured.”

These are bitter pills to swallow and many might fall in the trap of citing Dr. Kevorkian, death panels, and agism in health care as reasons why these end-of-life conversations should never start. But Butler argues that this very fear, our culture’s unwillingness “to engage with death until it is in our faces,” is what has gotten us so deep in trouble in the first place.

For example, 75 percent of elderly patients would rather die in their homes, yet 44 percent of them will die in hospitals, she writes. Last-ditch defibrillators, surgeries for incurable cancers and chemotherapy that only buys a few days continue to be the norm; while what she calls “Slow Medicine” — home and palliative care — remains on the fringes and is rarely covered by Medicare.

Meanwhile, about a third of Medicare patients will have surgery in the last year of their life and a tenth will have a surgery done in the last month of life, she writes — costing us an estimated $158 billion to $226 billion in medical overtreatment costs.

But what is perhaps worse is the emotional and traumatic toll continual care for a dying relative takes on the survivors, which is the true core of her book.

When Jeffrey, Butler’s hyper-intelligent Wesleyan history-professor dad, who lost his left arm while fighting in Italy during World War II, suffered a stroke at the age of 79, he was reduced to something much, much less: “With the memories, mind and reading comprehension of a highly educated 80-year-old; the spoken speech of a 4-or 5-year-old; and the physical dependence of a boy of 6.”

He could comprehend his shortcomings, and it made him “miserable,” she writes. At one point, he even commented that he had “lived too long.”

The stroke devastated not one, but two lives. “The day before [the stroke], my mother was a talented amateur artist and photographer, a woman of intimidating energy, and a spectacular housewife . . . After the stroke, she cared for my father the way she cared for my brothers and me when we were 3 or 4.”
At 77, her mother had become one of the 29 million “unpaid, politically powerless, and culturally invisible family caregivers,” while Butler herself joined the 24 million baby boomers now tending to sick parents.
When it became necessary for Jeffrey to undergo hernia surgery, his cardiologist suggested that they implant a pacemaker.

The family agreed, unaware of the downsides of what was such an (they would only later find) unnecessary preventative treatment.
Now, Jeffrey’s heart would tick on, long past his time should have been up.

“Not having a pacemaker would not have guaranteed my father a quick or easy death,” she writes. “But having a pacemaker deprived him of his best chance for one.”

Despite the surgery — or perhaps because of it — Jeffrey quickly got worse. Like about one third of those over 80, he suffered from dementia. His eyesight went, then his mobility. He began misspelling words. Then he began to see things that weren’t there. He became bladder and bowel incontinent.

“I woke up some morning in a fury. Why had his doctors not let nature take its course? If the pacemaker had never been implanted, I thought, my father might well have been out of his misery, and so would my mother and me,” Butler writes.

The family begged his cardiologist to turn off the pacemaker, but he refused. Other cardiologists refused, as well.

In 2008, Butler’s father contracted pneumonia.

Knowing that sending him to the hospital would only prolong his suffering with “life-saving” procedures, they avoided calling 911. He eventually became sick enough to be accepted into hospice care, where he finally died.
(NY Post)

the comments on the NY Post Article

NJ Poster
7 days ago
I have a better idea..how about we first ask the government why it allows nursing homes to receive about $6000 per month per patient whether it's private pay or government insurance?  Why do the nursing homes after receiving these monies allowed to pay their employees low wages?  What are these nursing homes allowed to steal the property of the patients?  Why are the nursing homes allow to file guardianship orders when the patients family want to remove them from the nursing homes?  Why are individuals allowed to own multiple nursing homes and make millions and millions off of private payees and the government.  Why does the government take every cent and every piece of property away from residents of a nursing home?  You don't think this happens....it does, multiple times, every day.  Fix that and see if our elderly do better, feel better live better.  Is Obamacare or any other government program or body going to ever address this?  This country should take better care of the elderly. 


Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Gays Use Salgado's Overall Poor Numbers To "Show" NYers Are In Favor Of Toevah "Marriage"

So how did the National Organization For Marriage's endorsed candidate do in NYC primary?

by Jeremy Hooper
NOM publicly endorsed anti-gay Democrat Erick Salgado, a protege of their pal Rubén Díaz. This is what a NOM endorsement gets you in New York City:
(98% reporting)
NYC primary results [New York Times]
In the endorsement of Salgado (which humorously misspelled Salgado's first name), NOM and its president, Brian Brown, also blasted Republican candidate Joe Lhota for supporting marriage equality. Joe Lhota easily won his primary and is now the city's Republican candidate for mayor.
A banner year you're having, NOM!

some of their comments
  • In any other organization such a stellar record of failure would have resulted in the top guy getting the axe long ago.

  • Today's lesson: If you are running for public office, one of your first priorities must be to assure that NOM does NOT endorse your candidacy.
  • Anthony Weiner got double the vote their bitch-boy got. The people have spoken. #NOMFail
If the entire Jewish Community supported Erick Salgado this major Chillul Hashem would have been avoided! 
This Means You, Williamsburg

Williamsburg Votes Against Erick Salgado, Showing They Don't Care About God Or His Torah

Click on picture to see percentages clearly
Despite the fact that Williamsburg's is the Jewish Community that is most strongly effected by the anti Torah gezaros that have been passed recently, (the stores that the city is suing are in Willi, no neighborhood in the city practices MBP as much as Willi, They are the only majority Orthodox neighborhood that has a lot of toevanicks living in the area etc.) the community decided to continue supporting anti Torah political candidates.  Showing the clear disregard for the Torah, is the fact that Erick Salgado did much better in the Hispanic parts of Williamsburg then the Jewish parts. Only 1%-2% of  all the Jews who voted in Williamsburg decided to vote for a candidate that was supported by many rabbaniem for his stance on morality.  The day before the election there was a robo-call by Rabbi Nelkenbaum (the Mirrer RY) that went out to Williamsburg urging all the Jews to vote for mayor candidate Erick Salgado the only candidate to oppose toevah.  Both the Aroniem and the Nalmoniem continue to show they don't care about God or his Torah by supporting in block candidates who support kol hatoevos tachas hashemesh.

Friday, September 13, 2013

Flatbush Picks Erick Salgado; Votes Like Ovdai H' And Not Avodi Askoniem

Light blue are areas (EDs) where Erick Salgado won a plurality of all votes
The Jewish Community in Flatbush voted strongly for Erick Salgado showing the world that the Jewish people oppose toevah.  Mr Salgado's best area in the city were in Flatbush where he was pulling over 20% in most Election Districts (ED).  Salgado's best ED (numerically) in the whole city was in Flatbush where he got 41.6% The very Strong support for Erick Salgado is in a large part due the backing of many rabbaniem there especially the Sefardic Rabbaniem.  The largest credit goes to Rav Nelkenbaum the Mirrer Rosh Yeshiva and Posek who was moser nefesh for this campaign.  His last robo call urging Jews to vote for the Torah got many Jews to vote for the Torah and Kavod Shamiem.

Salgado's best ED in the city (second best percentage)

Click on map to see percentages for all of Flatbush

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Why It's Politically Smart To Vote For Erick Salgado!

Why It's Politically Smart To Vote For Erick Salgado
"Respected" members of our communities have impressed upon us the importance of maintaining a relationship with elected officials.  From the perspective of the administrator of a charity organization or its supporters, a stable relationship with the political establishment can be the key to successful advocacy.  However, from a community perspective, a philosophy of electing candidates based upon maintaining the relationships with our community spokesman is selling our community needs for pennies on the dollar.

The sad fact that most Jews don’t realize is that while a close personal relationship between askanim and politicians are often useful in securing “earmark” grants (otherwise known as “pork” to the secular world) for a few institutions.  On the most important issues of our time the rest of the community doesn’t benefit from the “close relationship” at all.  In fact, the continued support from askanim gives these politicians a sense of entitlement and being insulated and protected in their continued opposition to things that really would help yeshiva families, like enacting tax credits for tuition dollars (which do not violated the Blaine Amendment prohibiting government money to support private schools).

If we simply vote for a politician because he’s going to win anyway, then he’s not going to listen us, because he knows we’re going to vote for him anyway.  Why should a politician (who's main goal is to get reelected and/or advance to a higher office) make any sacrifices or risk crossing powerful anti-Torah social movements or unions, if he knows we’re going to vote for him simply because “he’s going to win anyway, or is slightly less evil than his opponent?”.

The lifeblood of a vibrant democracy depends upon the fact that the elected officials are held accountable to the public for re-election.  A politician who does not fear that he will be voted of office by his constituents will feel virtually no responsibility to respond to their needs and desires. 

Until now, our adversaries have demonstrated far more commitment to holding their elected officials accountable for supporting their ideologies that are counter to ours.  Our adversaries have demonstrated time and time again that they are willing to vote a politician out of office if he doesn’t support their agenda.  As a result, when an elected official for our communities is put under pressure to bow to their  anti-Torah measures, it takes virtually no time for him to weigh the threat of punishment from our adversaries against the promise of support that he’s received from our communities to choose the bad measure. 

The Jewish community has shown an ability to rise to the occasion to rally and prostest when things become urgent concerns (like Eretz Yisroel, or when Bloomberg wanted to get rid of the child care vouchers).  But the most important time to act should not be when the evil decrees are proposed.  We need to make our voices heard before then, at election time, to make sure our elected representatives know we mean business. A protest can only have value if the elected officials know that we are prepared to carry through on election day.

Now is the time to make our voices heard.  It’s not really Thompson, Quinn or DeBlasio that needs to hear our voices.  Whichever one who wins is not going to come back to ask our opinion once they’ve won office.  Mayor Bloomberg held a meeting with Rabbonim and askonim regarding metzizah b’peh when he was running for office.  But he had no problem reverseing course when he no longer needed something from us, he promised us the vouchers before his election and revoked them after he got our votes and was reelected.

The main act of speech is directed for the future candidates.  Elections happen every year.   Overreliance on the philosophy of choosing the “lesser of two evils” based on who is likely to win has led us to the situation where the lesser evil keeps getting more evil every election cycle.

Remember 20 years ago Christine Quinn wouldn't have even been able to run for mayor.

Every single one of the candidates except Erick Salgado has demonstrated that they lack the fortitude to stand against the political wind and defend our interests – our values, our pocketbooks and our safety – while the political trend is to do the opposite.

Monday, September 9, 2013

NYC Endorsements

Bolded candidates are people you should vote for
 candidates in pink are the ones you should not vote for: striked through ones are extremely against the torah

and you should oppose even more then normal candidates and should not get your vote in these elections no matter what.

in short
good, bad, worse

City Wide Races (Democrats)
It's a mitzva gamur to vote for Erick Salgado; who stands as the only candidate who is against toevah and stand up for the Jewish Communities religious freedom!
each of the leading candidates are each one worse then the next Bill Thompson, Bill de Blasio, and Christine Quinn

Public Advocate
There are 5 candidates running for Public advocate 3 of them are clearly in favor of toevah "marriages" and worse.
Senator Daniel Squadron who voted for toevah "marriage", and allowing boys in to girls bathrooms, teaching kindergarteners about toevah.
City Council Woman Letitia James is a full fledged supporter of the toevah movement she supported a resolution in favor of  teaching Children about toevah, and same gender "marriage
Reshma Saujani supporter of same gender "marriage"
Catherine L. Guerriero supporter of same gender "marriage"
Sidique Wai he seems to be decent on moral issues
City Comptroller
Elliot Spitzer, and Scott Stringer are both extremely pro toevah and other perversions. Spitzer led the first push for toevah "marriage" in NY (plus his personal sickness) and  Scott Stringer refused to get married in NY because NY didn't allow toevah "marriage", he furthermore voted to allow the pro gay pedophilia group NAMBLA to keep their tax exempt status

Brooklyn Wide Races (Democrats)
District Attorney
Charles Hynes has prosecuted innocent people for political reasons to vote against him is a kiyom of the mitzva of pidyon shivoyiem!

Williamsburg City Council race (33rd Council District)
Steve Levin has voted for many toevah bills including "marriage"
Stephen E. Pierson is attacking Steve Levin for not strongly supporting teaching toevah to children
from Pierson's web-site

Borough Park/Flatbush (44th City Council District)
Jacob Flusberg is a Orthodox Jew who believes in the Torah.
David Greenfield supports recognizing gay relationships for immigration purposes, supports abortion on demand, and argued in court for Nadler to represent Borough Park and Flatbush, and goes against rabbaniem in supporting toevah candidates!

Flatbush (48th City Council District)
there are 5 candidates running
Natraj Bhushan
Chaim Deutsch
Ari Kagan
Igor Oberman supports toevah "marriage"
Theresa Scavo supports toevah "marriage" her lesbian daughter is a lawyer who writes for a gay law journal

Queens Wide Races (Democrats)
Tony Avella voted for same gender "marriage" 
Everly Brown
Melinda Katz is one of the biggest supporters of toevah in Queens, she supported toevah "marriage" back in 1994, who knows how low she sunk since then
Peter F. Vallone Jr.; the good he refused to vote for a toeava "marriage" resolution: the bad he didn't vote against it and voted for other toevah laws

Staten Island City Council race (50th City Council District)
John M. Mancuso supports toevah "marriage, and all sorts of other garbage
Mendy Mirocznik is a "orthodox" Jew who supports abortion


"Orthodox" David Greenfield Votes For Same Gender "Marriage" Resolution!

Bill that David Greenfield Voted for                                             

               On April 9th David Greenfield voted for a resolution to pass a immigration reform bill that recognizes same gender relationships as "families". 

Objectionable part of the Resolution David Greenfield voted for
Whereas, The narrow definition of "marriage" and "spouse" under current law prohibits the recognition of same-sex couples and therefore prevents U.S. citizens from sponsoring their immigrant partners for legal immigration status, leading to the needless disruption of families and the agonizing choice for many U.S. citizens to leave either their partner or their country 

the vote passed by a voice vote, anyone in the City Council who didn't vote for the bill would be listed by name here

Satmar Aroni Candidate (Stephen Pierson) Wants to Teach Children About Toevah And The History Of Toevah To Children

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

Bill Thompson Choose Gays Over Jews

Notice how Bill Thompson IGNORES the followup question regarding Christie's ban on repetitive therapy and goes on to the next question.  Thompson has shown he can't even answer a question regarding freedom of religion (when it conflicts with pervert "rights").  How can we trust this low life to defend it from their attacks?

I urge everyone to vote for Erick Salgado and be worthy of a kasiva ve chasima tovah!

May everyone (this means you EZRA) who will be voting for the lesbian Quinn YMS be signed into the sefer hamaves (on the yom hadin) and get all the curses in the 109 perek of tehillim (psalms)! (May your days be short and your position be taken by another. May your children by orphans and your wife a widow)

I wish everyone a kasiva vechasima tovah

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

All Major Mayor Candidates Are In Favor Giving Birth Control To Minors WITHOUT Their Parent's Consent

notice how Borough Park (where as of now doesn't give out condoms in Yeshivas) has one of (if not the) lowest pregnancy rates

Would you continue to distribute birth control pills and the morning-after pill in city schools? 

Bill de Blasio Public Advocate Democrat 
On the issue of whether to offer contraception in the schools, Mr. de Blasio was unequivocal, giving a simple “Yes,” without elaboration. He did not address the issue of parental consent, which is not now directly required.
 John C. Liu Comptroller Democrat 
Mr. Liu is supportive of the Bloomberg administration’s decision to distribute contraception in some city schools. Asked if he would continue it, he said “Yes,” without hedging or elaboration.
Christine C. Quinn City Council Speaker Democrat 
Ms. Quinn has made access to abortion and emergency contraception for women a signature issue, saying she wanted to make New York “as pro-choice and pro-women” as possible. In answer to this question, she said she would continue the current policy, but did not elaborate.
William C. Thompson Jr. Former Comptroller Democrat
In the debates over distributing condoms in the schools in the 1990s, Mr. Thompson, then a Brooklyn appointee to the Board of Education, was on the liberal side. He still says he has no objections to distributing birth control in schools.
Anthony D. Weiner Former Congressman Democrat
On birth control, Mr. Weiner proposed to tweak the current policy, perhaps influenced by his experience representing Queens. In the 1990s, parents of schoolchildren in that borough had been among the most vocal in the city in objecting to condom distribution, which is now the norm. He said that he would continue the policy, but that he would do a better job of informing parents that they could opt out.
John A. Catsimatidis C.E.O., Red Apple Group Republican 
Mr. Catsimatidis said he favored contraception in the schools, as long as it included a provision for “parental notification and consent.” He stayed away from the question of exactly what he meant by consent, a concept which different people interpret in different ways, and which the city and the courts have argued is fulfilled by the existing opt-out provision.
Joseph J. Lhota Former Chairman, M.T.A. Republican
Mr. Lhota said he believed parents should have a stronger hand in deciding whether their children were able to get birth control — like “any form of medication” — at school. He said birth control should not be distributed without parental “knowledge.” But he did not say he would ban it, and did not suggest changes to the policy that would ensure parents knew when their children were prescribed contraceptives.
(New York Times)

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Sephardic Community Federation Supports the Worst Candidates in Including Quinn YMS

Who NOT to vote for
The SFC put out a letter that a bunch of anonymous "rabbis" agreed with supporting their Quinn endorsement.
A letter "signed" by "leading" "rabbis"

 who NOT to vote for

Joe Lhota: is by far the most liberal of all the Republicans and was originally for the Mayor's MBP regulation before he realized he needed our votes.
Christine Quinn: "married" to a woman, need I say more.
Charles Hynes: who persecutes the innocent and protects the guilty.
David Greenfield: who used to work for the Sephardic Community Federation (and supports Quinn),  voted for an abortion on demand bill, testified in court regarding redistricting in favor of Nadler representing Borough Park (will report on that soon), and endorsed Lew Fidler against many Rabbaniem
Theresa Scavo: who supports same gender "marriage" and has a lesbian daughter who's on the board of a gay legal organization!

Christine Quinn Says She's In Favor Of Suing Orthodox Run Stores For Asking For Basic Tzniyus!

Ezra And Quinn in Williamsburg (where the stores in question are)

Quinn said she supported the city Human Rights Commission’s opposition to signs requiring modest dress by women in shops in Orthodox neighborhoods because, in her view, it places a burden on women that does not apply to men. By contrast, she said, formal dress codes in restaurants are applied uniformly to both genders. “If you had a restaurant that required women to wear formal attire and men could wear shorts and T-shirts that would be a problem.”
(Jewish Week)

This is despite the fact Rasmussen poll shows 64% of American are in favor the right of businesses to set dress codes

Sign Quinn YMS "thinks" are "discriminatory"

In towns all over the country, business owners, town officials and even judges are setting new dress code rules. A Tennessee judge has set conservative guidelines for female lawyers in the courtroom; banks in a Florida town have banned hats, hoods and sunglasses in an attempt to thwart robberies, and a New Jersey shore town has banned overly saggy pants on its boardwalk. 
Most American Adults (64%) agree that business owners should be allowed to establish dress codes for people who enter their facility, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Just 23% disagree. Thirteen percent (13%) are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
(rasmussen poll)