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.

 

Why Denying Access to Public Accommodations IS a Crime

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 07:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: kaylaluv

Why did you skirt the question?

Would you eat a cake baked by a person who was forced against their will to do so, and who has apparent disdain for you or your life choices?



The answer is yes, because:

1) A true Christian would never do anything so un-Christian-like as to deliberately spoil or sabotage the cake in some way, right?

2) It is my right to not be refused based on my race, religion or sexual orientation, regardless of the baker's opinion of me. It is disingenuous to say that it isn't about sexual orientation, because it is all about that. Straight wedding - okay, gay wedding - not okay. What's the difference between the two?




posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

I guess the difference between you and me is that I would never force someone to make me something against their will to begin with, nor do I wander around America thinking that it's my "right" to have everyone accept me and everything I do in life.

In my life, there is no difference between the two types of weddings, but then again, I am not a Christian, and my beliefs don't tell me that it's wrong for someone to be in love with a person of the same sex.

We can discuss the legal and symantic differences between a true "right" and something that is just illegal, but that's a pointless discussion here because I think we're going nowhere at this point.

Enjoy your cake...I'll abstain from it and get my cake elsewhere.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

It's not about acceptance. It's about being treated equally. Someone once said "all men are created equal". If you don't treat people equally, it's the same as saying they aren't equal to others. Laws are put in place to make sure that people are treated as they were created: equal.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 09:42 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Then said laws shouldn't have to indicate certain groups in order to appease people.

But the reality is that not all people are equal, they're just "created" that way. By the time we're all adults, there are major, glaring differences, and I'm not equal to a child rapist murderer.



posted on Apr, 3 2015 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: kaylaluv

Then said laws shouldn't have to indicate certain groups in order to appease people.

But the reality is that not all people are equal, they're just "created" that way. By the time we're all adults, there are major, glaring differences, and I'm not equal to a child rapist murderer.


So now you are comparing a law-abiding homosexual to a child rapist murderer? That's not bigoted at all, is it. If you are a criminal, you deserve to be punished. If you are not a criminal, you do not deserve to be punished. A homosexual is not a criminal just because they are a homosexual, therefore they deserve to be treated like any other law-abiding citizen.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
I've yet to see anyone having utilities like electricity, water, food, shelter, gas, transportation and the like being denied due to the reasons the pizzeria and bakery have done.

It's a f*****g cake, a f*****g pizza...not a necessity. Let the free market dictate what happens.

As a business, you piss off too many people, you don't have business.

Want to go after something important? Go after those who would deny essentials to another for the same reasons...go after that.

I've been denied things at businesses for reasons I felt were along the same type of reasoning, so, I don't shop/eat there. Was I put off and a little pissed? Of course! But did I sue? Did I threaten the owner with violence to them or their family, or threaten to burn down their business.....those who do that...well, may want to re-think the words and actions.

Boycott would be suffice. Threatening another with violence or destruction of property, now that's just pure intolerance and hatred. Should be f*****g ashamed....

Think.
edit on 4-4-2015 by BlackboxInquiry because: missed a word



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackboxInquiry




I've yet to see anyone having utilities like electricity, water, food, shelter, gas, transportation and the like being denied due to the reasons the pizzeria and bakery have done.

It's a f*****g cake, a f*****g pizza...not a necessity. Let the free market dictate what happens.


Sounds to me like people are willing to deny food, or any other service that they may have the power to withhold.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: BlackboxInquiry




I've yet to see anyone having utilities like electricity, water, food, shelter, gas, transportation and the like being denied due to the reasons the pizzeria and bakery have done.

It's a f*****g cake, a f*****g pizza...not a necessity. Let the free market dictate what happens.


Sounds to me like people are willing to deny food, or any other service that they may have the power to withhold.


When essentials are denied...then it would be wise to smartly engage the public over something like that...



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


How isn't enacting a law that amounts to state endorsement of discrimination legislating morality?


Both laws, either banning discrimination or allowing discrimination, are moral decisions best left to the individual.


Why are the feelings of some fundamentalist Christians more import than the most basic right of all others to be active participants in society with equal access to what is open to the rest of society?


The feelings of Fundamentalists are not important.

What is important is your perception of business, which is flawed.

I can sell a product or service, it is my right to do so. I cannot force an individual to buy my product or service, I work on the basis of privilege if someone chooses to do business with me in the role of customer. It is not my right to force another into a business transaction. All business transactions, as contracts, must be entered into willingly by two parties.

As a customer, I have the right to spend my money on any good or service of my choosing,- but I do not have the right to force a business into a transaction with me if they chose not to--regardless of their reasoning. I may have the right to spend my money as I see fit, but I do not have the right to force a seller to do business with me if they do not want to.

My role as customer in that context is a privilege.

It is not a crime to deny someone your business, as the owner of the merchandise/service, it is your right to discriminate.

Refusing someone service does not trample their rights, so there is no victim, and because of this, it cannot be called a crime. It is a non-crime.

Modern "liberals" (they are not true liberals), are closet fascists that get-off on pretending to be non-violent and anti-gun, and then in the same breath using men with guns to coerce people into their perception of acceptable behavior.

It is a joke.

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

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



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 07:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
So now you are comparing a law-abiding homosexual to a child rapist murderer? That's not bigoted at all, is it. If you are a criminal, you deserve to be punished. If you are not a criminal, you do not deserve to be punished. A homosexual is not a criminal just because they are a homosexual, therefore they deserve to be treated like any other law-abiding citizen.


Oh, holy hell...I was (clearly) comparing myself to child rapist murderers to illustrate that, once people are adults, we are not all "equal" in either morals or actions. Stop turning my comments into something that they're not.

I'm not an idiot--I know homosexuality is not a crime, and if you go back and read my replies, I state more than once that I disagree with discrimination. But I don't need to continue to try and prove that to you.

This discussion is over (again) because I'm tired of having to restate every comment in order to clarify for you. We have differing opinions, let's just leave it at that.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join