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.

 

"Tolerance Works Both Ways"

page: 7
8
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh my, you're thinking too small! Here are some of my popcorn-grabbing scenarios I cannot wait to see :

1.) A Muslim businessman denying service to a Christian.

2.) A Christian businessman denying service to either an atheist or an LGBT person mistakenly.

3. A male businessguy denying service to a woman. ( cause wimmins belong in that thar kitchen! ;-) )

4.) A Baptist denying service to any other denomination. ( My personal fave.)

And finally, the one that's going to really be fun to watch....

5.) White businessguy denies service to someone who dares to be not-white.

Oh, Indiana, you're in for some fun times. All are welcome to watch at my place, got plenty of popcorn.




posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Ironhawke


Oh the phobia! The unmitigated phobia! Of white male christian Baptists. At least you are focused.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Ironhawke

I just see in any Biblical literature where it could be supported that serving someone who isn't white is a "sin" or "leading to sin". I don't see how a white, Christian business owner could claim it was "against their religious beliefs" to say that.

If I was a judge I'd ask them to prove to me that it was "against their religious beliefs" -- to show me where in their literature it stipulates that doing business or associating with someone of another race is deemed an offence to their "God".

I just don't see this holding up for a lot of situations in court. This just opens up a whole can-o-worms.
edit on 1-4-2015 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

When the gays and progressives use race attitudes to surfboard in on anything its always out of ignorance really. Or desperation.

And your right there is no and never was any christian imperative to discriminate based on race. The gay issue is another thing altogether. And of course they are going to zone in like the sodomites in the gates of Sodom became affected by the angels "that we may know them". Don't expect anything but hostility toward contrary views. They are in deep, elbow deep in the borderline. Boy Scouts, gay ministers ect.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Logarock

What phobia? I'm just looking at all the ramifications of this law. Gonna be more fun than the last election. Also. former white male Christian Baptist. So that argument is invalid..and kind of a strawman. Telling me I'm phobic rather than addressing the fact that this insane law is about to turn Indiana into a bigger mess.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Where I live several stores have placed signs in their window to indicate that they are "Gay Friendly". Am I breaking the law if I choose not to give my business to those stores?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

Am I the only one that would feel really weird to see a sign like that in 2015?

What have we become as a society?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Most of the signs are downtown near a couple of college campuses. I never really had a problem with this issue until the last few years. Mainly, I didn't care. I didn't mind a polite inquiry, if they were willing to take a polite "not interested" as an answer. As has been mentioned, how do you know, if they don't bring it up? There was a guy being really obnoxious one night and I warned him that I wasn't going to put up with much more. He told me that he was gay and that if I slugged him it would be a hate crime. I looked at him and told him,"If I don't slug you in a situation where I would slug a straight guy, that's discrimination too." He left. The colleges are the ones pushing this. If you have a nearby business, you have to kow-tow to the LGBT crowd otherwise they protest or vandalize your business.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Logarock

And your right there is no and never was any christian imperative to discriminate based on race.


Then what is: Mark of Ham?



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499
If you have a nearby business, you have to kow-tow to the LGBT crowd otherwise they protest or vandalize your business.


You mean you have to serve everyone equally?

Shocking!

Near the colleges. Young and educated. Works for me.



posted on Apr, 1 2015 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




Am I the only one that would feel really weird to see a sign like that in 2015?

What have we become as a society?


Pathetically divisive, self-absorbed, self-righteous, and a sense of personal individual entitlement above all others... come hell or high water ?




posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 07:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: Logarock

What phobia? I'm just looking at all the ramifications of this law. Gonna be more fun than the last election. Also. former white male Christian Baptist. So that argument is invalid..and kind of a strawman. Telling me I'm phobic rather than addressing the fact that this insane law is about to turn Indiana into a bigger mess.



Well just read your post above. You may not even realize it but you broke down the thing into white, male, christian and Baptist.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
You mean you have to serve everyone equally?

Shocking!

Near the colleges. Young and educated. Works for me.


No. You have to put up with crap that if anybody else did it you would throw them out. Up to and including sexual harassment.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Most of the signs are downtown near a couple of college campuses. I never really had a problem with this issue until the last few years. Mainly, I didn't care. I didn't mind a polite inquiry, if they were willing to take a polite "not interested" as an answer. As has been mentioned, how do you know, if they don't bring it up? There was a guy being really obnoxious one night and I warned him that I wasn't going to put up with much more. He told me that he was gay and that if I slugged him it would be a hate crime. I looked at him and told him,"If I don't slug you in a situation where I would slug a straight guy, that's discrimination too." He left. The colleges are the ones pushing this. If you have a nearby business, you have to kow-tow to the LGBT crowd otherwise they protest or vandalize your business.


That's one of the problems with protected classes, whenever you do anything they do not like, they can claim "discrimination." It is a whole cottage industry of lawyers suing under the ADA and EEOC and that's how Jessie Jackson makes his money with extortion. It is definitely a consequence, either intentional or unintentional, from this process.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
What I really need an explanation for is why are there those being descriminated against wanting to make someone take their money. I believe in boycotts.


Exactly this. I don't see why anyone (i.e. government) should get involved. Either places that refuses to cater to a certain group will either fail or keep trucking along. As the old saying goes, "Hit them where it hurts, their pocket books".



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: JIMC5499

originally posted by: Annee
You mean you have to serve everyone equally?

Shocking!

Near the colleges. Young and educated. Works for me.


No. You have to put up with crap that if anybody else did it you would throw them out. Up to and including sexual harassment.


I did have a business.

I know the difference between discrimination and throwing someone out for being obnoxious or destructive.

I threw a Christian out. He thought his church donated computer should be fixed for free because he does God's work. His response to NO! Was definitely not Christlike.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

You seem to really know business law, that's interesting stuff. I was turned down for being a non-Christian once for a job at a hospice, but I assume they have some other arrangement than being a "public accommodation".

I think its really clear that refusing a service based on race or orientation is clearly discriminatory. What's more interesting to me is situations where someone offers a wide spectrum of skills, and is being asked to use them in a way they don't normally use them, which is against their religious conviction. An example might be a Muslim who cooks different meals on demand, but refuses to make pork or alcohol because he believes its harmful to people and thus a sin to serve it. Its fundamentally different than the same guy refusing to serve hummus to a non-muslim due to faith: instead its asking to to partake in actions he doesn't normally partake in in serving to people what he believes are poisons.

That's where the line is here to me. It sounds like you've studied some law, I haven't myself. But I do see trends and contradictions, and the way the law tends to avoid the latter in the long term. Discrimination will be fought, but the right of people to offer service in line with their values seems like a pretty old trend.

Then you have the social trends. One line you said I have to take issue with is tying the Indiana bill to big business: its quite the opposite, in fact its kinda fun to see Wal-Mart waving the rainbow flag over all this. They don't want to deal with anything like legal discrimination, they don't want to deal with customers in evangelical areas asking them not to serve gay customers and threatening boycott otherwise. Its so much easier to say "sorry, law says we can't" and continue to serve all customers. But discrimination won't be legalized...in fact, the opposite is happening. I just read a good piece from Time that says this whole thing will actually be good for gay rights:
time.com...
Here's the key line:

While nearly 90% of people believe that it’s already illegal to discriminate against gay and transgender people, there are no such laws in the majority of the United States.

So what I'm calling discriminatory isn't actually discrimination by law in many states, that's what actually needs focus and change here, rather than the nuanced conversation of where the line is between a person's religious rights and freedoms. This is a country where Nazis are allowed to march in the streets due to their constitutional rights. Positioning gay rights against religious freedom (constitutional rights) of religious people is a losing proposition long term for the LGBT community.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 01:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: tridentblue
a reply to: Pinke
I was turned down for being a non-Christian once for a job at a hospice, but I assume they have some other arrangement than being a "public accommodation".

It might have been a religiously funded hospice. There was some problems in Europe about a decade ago with previously religious hospitals discriminating as if they still had that category. I could see it happening in other countries easily.


What's more interesting to me is situations where someone offers a wide spectrum of skills, and is being asked to use them in a way they don't normally use them, which is against their religious conviction. An example might be a Muslim

One of the best real world examples of this is Muslim taxi drivers. Some states offered them a special light to identify themselves, others didn't want to accommodate them at all, and some taxi companies will arrange another taxi if you have alcohol or a dog you wish to transport. It's technically right on the line since they can carry out the vast amount of their job and other drivers can deal with those passengers. Its a worthwhile case to look up.


Discrimination will be fought, but the right of people to offer service in line with their values seems like a pretty old trend.

Around 6000 BC, the Sumerians invented the idea that everyone within a marketplace must agree to serve one another, putting politics aside and refusing to price fix. That's why we know who the Sumerians are, everyone could go to their marketplaces, so they did, and they prospered. Encroaching on businesses is older than most people think.



So what I'm calling discriminatory isn't actually discrimination by law in many states, that's what actually needs focus and change here, rather than the nuanced conversation of where the line is between a person's religious rights and freedoms. This is a country where Nazis are allowed to march in the streets due to their constitutional rights. Positioning gay rights against religious freedom (constitutional rights) of religious people is a losing proposition long term for the LGBT community.

I think I'd have to hear more of your opinion to discuss it. I'm not 100% sure I understand
Probably because I'm dumb haha

Trans# rights are probably some of the most controversial, partially due to chilling effects. I have spoken to Americans who seem to think they need to provide special toilet facilities or have to hire men wearing dresses. It's incredibly weird America's legal system vs what Americans think their legal system can do. Especially when there are no case histories of a certain law which doesn't exist being applied.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

I think it was a religiously funded hospice. They explained that they could hire only Christians legally, but I don't remember why.

Anyway, the point I'm arguing is that there are two separate things:
1) Clear discrimination where a business refuses a service it normally provides to someone based on WHO they are.
2) A complicated and nuanced realm where a business or person refuses a service they don't normally do based on WHAT it is, and the fact that it conflicts with their values.

The problem here is that you have people diving into the mess that is the second thing when so much work still need be done with the first. That's why I linked to the Time article, which points out the lack of discrimination laws protecting LGBT in so many states. Taking that on would do a lot of good without this whole battle about religious freedom.

The Sumerian law sounds anti-discrimination (thing 1, who other people are) but I'll bet you if you went back in time to that, you'd find people not serving goats milk on Tuesday or whatever due to their ancient religions, just as many businesses close on Sunday, the Christian day of worship, today. That's thing 2, people refusing to partake in action that conflicts with religion beliefs, like working on sabbath. Thoughts on right or wrong aside, arguments of the form "Its discrimination if you don't work on Sunday" are a way heavier political lift than arguments of the form "Its discrimination if you don't serve me when you are serving others because of who I am". Its seriously baffling to me why its being taken on.

Anyway, on the lighter side, all this makes me remember this good atheist comedy routine I saw:
www.youtube.com...

I'm glad you brought up the trans thing, yeah I think that's a big challenge. I feel like there's a hole in my understanding of trans people, and that's true of lots of people. There needs to be a setting where the dumb questions can be asked and explored without fear so people can understand what being transsexual is really about, and finally be comfortable with it. Right now I think its just too mysterious for people.


edit on 3-4-2015 by tridentblue because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh my, you're thinking too small! Here are some of my popcorn-grabbing scenarios I cannot wait to see :

1.) A Muslim businessman denying service to a Christian.

2.) A Christian businessman denying service to either an atheist or an LGBT person mistakenly.

3. A male businessguy denying service to a woman. ( cause wimmins belong in that thar kitchen! ;-) )

4.) A Baptist denying service to any other denomination. ( My personal fave.)

And finally, the one that's going to really be fun to watch....

5.) White businessguy denies service to someone who dares to be not-white.

Oh, Indiana, you're in for some fun times. All are welcome to watch at my place, got plenty of popcorn.


Yes, unfortunately people think this is about controlling their "beliefs". No, it's just about making sure society keeps Justice and actually treat its citizens as equals. Now, when people start denying these unfair religious people services, they will have a victim mentality and claim that it's persecution like hypocrites.




top topics



 
8
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join