It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Discrimination now Legal In Mississippi

page: 14
15
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Benevolent Heretic


You can THINK whatever you want. But there's a difference between your opinion and what the LAW is.


Unconstitutional laws need not be followed


You can THINK business owners shouldnt have the right, but no matter what you do, or what the gay community does, people will ALWAYS find a way to discriminate against people they would rather not associate with. As I said in a previous post, in the case of a bakery the excuse is as simple as "sorry, we have too many outstanding orders, your cake wouldnt be done in time". It's as simple as that. It's a sad day when business owners are forced to lie in their own business.

Property rights take priority over hurt feelings. There will always be bakeries willing to bake cakes for gay weddings, and they will reap a financial benefit for their smart business choices. Jesus freaks, while similar to schizophrenics in their beliefs, still have the right to run their business in accordance with their psychotic belief system.




posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by doubletap
 



doubletap
You listed threats to health and safety, and in the case of fraud, an act which would cause actual damages.

Hurt feelings are not the same thing.


Yeah, and black people should just shut up and go to the next restaurant or sit in the back of the bus. Who cares if their "feelings are hurt"?

Jesus! People are so cold and unloving, I can't believe it!


Okay let's take this one step further. You say a business should HAVE to do business with ANYONE? Should a black baker HAVE to make a cake for a KKK member that says "Long live the KKK" ? I mean really? If he doesn't the 'customer' could sue him. You think some asshole KKK member wouldn't go there just for the fun of it? Forcing people to comply goes both ways folks.
edit on 5-4-2014 by Khaleesi because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Benevolent Heretic


Yeah, and black people should just shut up and go to the next restaurant or sit in the back of the bus. Who cares if their "feelings are hurt"?

Jesus! People are so cold and unloving, I can't believe it!


Cold and unloving? Give me a break, emotion has no place in public policy.

Hurt feelings are a joke. Offended? Too effing bad, grow up and become a mature adult.

There is no right to force someone to do business with you



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 



doubletap
As I said in a previous post, in the case of a bakery the excuse is as simple as "sorry, we have too many outstanding orders, your cake wouldnt be done in time". It's as simple as that.


I find it quite hypocritical that a business owner would choose to sin to show his judgment and disapproval of sinners. And I find it pretty crazy that so many here would support such an action. The hypocrisy is astounding, really.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Khaleesi
 



Khaleesi
Okay let's take this one step further. You say a business should HAVE to do business with ANYONE?


No, I didn't say that.


Should a black baker HAVE to make a cake for a KKK member that says "Long live the KKK" ?


No.
1. The KKK is not a protected group.
2. The baker can freely refuse to put a message on a cake that he disagrees with. That's not the same as refusing to bake a plain cake for the KKK member.

So many are confused about the difference between providing a product that he has agreed to provide to the public and refusing to serve a PERSON because they belong to a group.

edit on 4/5/2014 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

Folks ARE losing their bakeries over this...


Officials in Oregon have ruled that Sweet Cakes by Melissa, a bakery that made national news after refusing to make a cake for a gay wedding last year, violated a lesbian couple’s civil rights.



In September, TheBlaze reported that, following intense scrutiny and furor among gay rights advocates that inevitably impacted business, the Kleins were forced to close Sweet Cakes by Melissa. Now, they’re operating out of their home.


Read Me



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Benevolent Heretic


I find it quite hypocritical that a business owner would choose to sin to show his judgment and disapproval of sinners. And I find it pretty crazy that so many here would support such an action. The hypocrisy is astounding, really.



That is a result of unconstitutional laws forced upon the people by jackasses in government.

The solution is less government interference in peoples lives, not more, and certainly not more infringements upon peoples rights.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Bone75
 


The bakery was not "shut down". They willingly closed their business to avoid having to obey state law. People boycotted and protested them. That's the free market and free speech at work.

Another case of making the bigots look like victims.



“The LGBT attacks are the reason we are shutting down the shop. They have killed our business through mob tactics.”


Source

I don't know what kind of "attacks" and "mob tactics" they're talking about but boycotting and protesting is the American way!



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Even ultra leftist Bill Maher admits if you cross the "gay mafia", they wont let up and you get "whacked".

They dont want equality, they want others punished for their beliefs.




posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   
When you open a business that is a "public accommodation" the rights of private property do not apply.

This is true far back into English Common Law, which of course, our legal system continues.

Any question about equal treatment before the laws, State, local or Federal, is answered in the Constitution in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Further, the First Amendment prevents the Government from establishing a religion. These foolish types of laws are fundamentally flawed because they do just that. The States will realize this, just as they did with Jim Crow.

However, I propose a simpler solution:

Let the shopkeeper post a list in their window of those they would rather not serve due to their religious beliefs. Let them make their bigotry publicly known. That's only fair, right? I know that I would not even darken the door of a "business" that didn't want my business.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Mississippians are not all to blame. They have been taught false teachings by pastors, who are just men, but it is almost hero status. My aunt Betty use to drive out the country to drink her beer so the deacon would not catch her drinking at home. Like everybody did not know she drank like a fish.

1 Peter 4:1-3 "Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin; 2That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God."

Fools, we all suffer from lusts of the flesh. The only way any are getting out alive or into heaven, is because of the love and Forgiveness of God. This law is to justify their hatred and think they are pleasing God. Hypocrites.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
I challenge anyone to prove that a citizen and member of the public, upon entering a business that is open to do business with the public, and upon the refusal of that business to serve a member of the public ready and willing to pay for services, who then challenges that refusal, is doing anything but promoting equality for all.

The same arguments were used 60 years ago to say that a water fountain inside a business was the same as a spigot and hose outside.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:45 AM
link   

doubletap

That is a result of unconstitutional laws forced upon the people by jackasses in government.

The solution is less government interference in peoples lives, not more, and certainly not more infringements upon peoples rights.


People said the same things during slavery and Jim Crow FYI. They were very vocal about the idea that the solution was not the government, but in fact the first step in both cases was public policy that was turned into law by government. The problem with your approach is that it serves to ignore the problem completely, Jim Crow endured 100 years beyond slavery exactly because "small government" politicians used similar rhetoric to yours. In fact if you read the articles of secession prior to the civil war they also used similar arguments to justify breaking away from the union, mind you slavery was constitutional. To end slavery was to many, forcing unconstitutional laws upon the public by the jackasses in government.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Gryphon66

However, I propose a simpler solution:

Let the shopkeeper post a list in their window of those they would rather not serve due to their religious beliefs. Let them make their bigotry publicly known. That's only fair, right? I know that I would not even darken the door of a "business" that didn't want my business.



That is a great solution! I think it is the best one yet!



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Gryphon66
When you open a business that is a "public accommodation" the rights of private property do not apply.

This is true far back into English Common Law, which of course, our legal system continues.

Any question about equal treatment before the laws, State, local or Federal, is answered in the Constitution in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Further, the First Amendment prevents the Government from establishing a religion. These foolish types of laws are fundamentally flawed because they do just that. The States will realize this, just as they did with Jim Crow.

However, I propose a simpler solution:

Let the shopkeeper post a list in their window of those they would rather not serve due to their religious beliefs. Let them make their bigotry publicly known. That's only fair, right? I know that I would not even darken the door of a "business" that didn't want my business.



LOL.

You believe business owners waive their property rights when they open their doors for business? Seriously?

So those laws about concealed carry on your own property be it your home or business just dont exist then, correct?

If you want a first amendment argument.....By forcing jesus freaks to serve someone that would be offensive to their religion, government is actually making a law that abridges their freedom of religion. It isnt establishing one, it is passing one that forces people to violate their goofy little beliefs.

A simple yes or no question:

Do you want government to force business owners to serve customers the owner would rather not? If so, how is that not involuntary servitude?



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by spurgeonatorsrevenge
 


Up until the passage and ratification of the 13th Amendment, those laws were unconstitutional. Fortunately the 13th rectified that problem.

Patronizing a business is not a civil right. Getting a wedding cake is not a civil right.

Government has no authority to force someone to provide services or products they would rather not deal with.

It basically comes down to this: If a bakery doesnt want to provide services to gay customers, cool, that is their right. There are plenty of other bakeries that will happily provide those cakes to gay customers, and as a result, those bakeries will flourish and the jesus freak bakeries will suffer financial loss as a result of their belief in fairy tales.

Bible thumpers have every right to make poor business decisions. It is their money to lose.

Personally, I avoid any business that advertises itself or has a reputation of being a "religious" company. Advertise yourself as a "christian company"? You wont be seeing my dollars. That being said, I am forced to defend these nutjobs under the guise of protecting their rights as business owners.

Any business owner has the right to refuse service to anyone they choose for whatever reason they deem appropriate. Anything less would be putting the business owners in a position of involuntary servitude, and that is 100% unconstitutional. Government has put business owners in the position of having to lie as to why service is refused, and that is the real travesty here.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 



doubletap
They dont want equality, they want others punished for their beliefs.


And these bigoted Christians don't want religious freedom. They want others punished for who they ARE.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Benevolent Heretic


And these bigoted Christians don't want religious freedom. They want others punished for who they ARE.


Punished how? By having to go to another bakery?

Care to enumerate the punishments that are hoped for?



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 12:20 PM
link   

doubletap
reply to post by spurgeonatorsrevenge
 


Up until the passage and ratification of the 13th Amendment, those laws were unconstitutional. Fortunately the 13th rectified that problem.

Patronizing a business is not a civil right. Getting a wedding cake is not a civil right.

Government has no authority to force someone to provide services or products they would rather not deal with.

It basically comes down to this: If a bakery doesnt want to provide services to gay customers, cool, that is their right. There are plenty of other bakeries that will happily provide those cakes to gay customers, and as a result, those bakeries will flourish and the jesus freak bakeries will suffer financial loss as a result of their belief in fairy tales.

Bible thumpers have every right to make poor business decisions. It is their money to lose.

Personally, I avoid any business that advertises itself or has a reputation of being a "religious" company. Advertise yourself as a "christian company"? You wont be seeing my dollars. That being said, I am forced to defend these nutjobs under the guise of protecting their rights as business owners.

Any business owner has the right to refuse service to anyone they choose for whatever reason they deem appropriate. Anything less would be putting the business owners in a position of involuntary servitude, and that is 100% unconstitutional. Government has put business owners in the position of having to lie as to why service is refused, and that is the real travesty here.


I suspect that we might disagree on the notions surrounding business...
But in this case I agree with you, I do not think the problem is systemic enough to warrant intervention. The bigot would loose my business too, in fact I would rather know so I could stay the hell away from giving them my coin.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 12:22 PM
link   

doubletap

Benevolent Heretic


And these bigoted Christians don't want religious freedom. They want others punished for who they ARE.


Punished how? By having to go to another bakery?

Care to enumerate the punishments that are hoped for?


No, I think she means burning in hell, or getting taken back into the woods to show some christian justice.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join