It's Starting--> Indiana Christian Pizzeria ATTACKED by gay lobby

originally posted by: vonclod
a reply to: undo
Ahh, my apologies..(facepalm)

To that question I think mother nature usually introduces a disease when animal populations get out of control.

hehe no worries.

For those who questioned "how did Twitter, blogoschere become Gay Lobby tools of hate?"

Well find the transcript on RushLinbaugh.com today's show hour one.

He reveals it is just ten people involved stirring-up the impression of thousand of outrage. Americans.
He also know their names, addresses, and their professions.

45 minute mark of hour one it begins.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: beezzer

My question was, do you approve of people saying whatever they want, even if it pisses you off, or do you want them to "shut up" if what they say pisses you off? Which is it? It's an honest question.

Telling someone to shut up, is different from not allowing them to speak.

I guess I'm not free to tell someone to shut up.

Is that what you're telling me?

But do you really want them to shut up? Really? If an atheist told a Christian to shut up, you would bash the atheist's treatment of the Christian, saying he was being disrespectful of the Christian's opinion. You are certainly free to tell someone to shut up, but don't be surprised by the accusation of hypocrisy.

You speak of freedoms and respect of others beliefs.

WHERE ARE YOUR POSTS DEFENDING CHRISTIAN RIGHTS?

Christians have the right to believe whatever they want. They don't have the right to act on those beliefs when it takes away someone else's rights. Gays are citizens who have a civil right to participate in this society, and that includes having the same access to public accommodation that everyone else has.

If an atheist had a business, and he said that because of his beliefs, he refused to sell his products to Christians - I would say the same thing to the atheist. Christians, as citizens, have the civil right to participate in this society, and that includes having the same access to public accommodation that everyone else has.

But the people in question did nothing to anyone.

If someone publicly says, "I will kill the President the next chance I get", do the authorities just ignore it because he hasn't done anything yet? Extreme example, I realize, but my point is, if someone publicly announces that they WILL refuse service to a group because of who that group is, you gotta expect some response. Not saying I 100% agree with the specific response, but I'm certainly not surprised that there was one.

There was a time not so long ago in the US where people were blacklisted and punished for certain beliefs--not actually doing anything, mind you--but for simply having a belief system that was not popular. This was call "McCarthyism." Do we really want to go back to those times?

We're not just talking about a belief. We are talking about someone saying that they WILL ACT on that belief.
If the Christian owner said that he/she personally was against gay marriage, but he/she will do business with them because he/she will not mix business with personal belief -- I highly doubt you would see the public backlash we are seeing now.

If someone said that they were a communist AND that they would participate in a war against the U.S. and democracy - that's a little different than saying they believe in communist principles but had no intention of doing anything about it.

So office of pre-crime then is it? Got it.

Did the government arrest or fine/penalize the pizza owner for a crime?

a reply to: NavyDoc

Except we know for a fact that even relatively educated people commit conjunction errors all the time, and studies have shown that atheists and rapists are trusted to act ethically at about the same rate by these people.

a reply to: yuppa

There is very little that is "fair" in life, in my experience.

However, these laws are and should be declared unConstitutional. (City of Boerne v. Flores - SCOTUS Website)

Anyone who supports the US Constitution, freedom or equity before the laws would call for the repeal of these laws.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Everyone is just doing their own thing.

Isn't that what you always preach?

I can also, by the same token, criticize the motivations of those doing so and point out the hypocrisy of their behavior, the fine examples of "tolerance" they are.

OTOH, the death threats and threats of violence these people have been getting based on this manufactured outrage are indeed illegal.

You want hypocrisy?

Let an atheist business speak up.

They should if they want to. I think they have every right to do what they want and, if fact, have on several occasions.

Not the point.

I've been on all sides.

I've been Christian - - I've been atheist.
I've been Republican - - I've been non-affiliated.
I've lived in Right Wing Arizona - - I've lived in liberal Los Angeles.
I've worked for large corporations - - I've worked for small companies - - I've owned my own small business.
I've worked in religious environments - - I've worked in predominately LGBT environments.

Fundy Christians are arrogant and think they are in charge. That everyone should bow down to them. They're not.

I have no sympathy for Fundy Christians not allowed to discriminate.

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

which "these people"?

originally posted by: Granite
For those who questioned "how did Twitter, blogoschere become Gay Lobby tools of hate?"

Well find the transcript on RushLinbaugh.com today's show hour one.

He reveals it is just ten people involved stirring-up the impression of thousand of outrage. Americans.
He also know their names, addresses, and their professions.

45 minute mark of hour one it begins.

Well, thank goodness that voice of unity, Rush Limbaugh, has once again demonstrated his love and compassion for humanity.

Thank god for Rush's standing up to divisiveness in this country!




(Oh, but just for the sake of argument, curiously, outside of the right-wing politically correct echo chamber, how do 10 individuals on Twitter constitute a "mafia" or represent the positions of all gays, everywhere?)

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Everyone is just doing their own thing.

Isn't that what you always preach?

I can also, by the same token, criticize the motivations of those doing so and point out the hypocrisy of their behavior, the fine examples of "tolerance" they are.

OTOH, the death threats and threats of violence these people have been getting based on this manufactured outrage are indeed illegal.

You want hypocrisy?

Let an atheist business speak up.

They should if they want to. I think they have every right to do what they want and, if fact, have on several occasions.

Not the point.

I've been on all sides.

I've been Christian - - I've been atheist.
I've been Republican - - I've been non-affiliated.
I've lived in Right Wing Arizona - - I've lived in liberal Los Angeles.
I've worked for large corporations - - I've worked for small companies - - I've owned my own small business.
I've worked in religious environments - - I've worked in predominately LGBT environments.

Fundy Christians are arrogant and think they are in charge. That everyone should bow down to them. They're not.

I have no sympathy.

I don't like fundies either and no, they are not in charge or at least shouldn't be. I'm all for people, however, making their own decisions because I want to be able to make my own decisions and I believe in treating other people how I like to be treated.

Punishing the group you don't like simply because the pendulum has swung to your side is a dangerous precedent, IMHO.

a reply to: kaylaluv

While you're asking, Kayla, see if you can get answers to any of these:

Have any Christians anywhere been restricted in anyway from following the actual practices of their religion?

As one poster earlier spuriously claimed, have any Christians been forced to hide and pray in basements?

At what point did OUTRIGHT LYING become acceptable for Christians? Isn't that also a SIN?

Does that mean they have to stop doing business with themselves???

(Best of luck getting straight answers to any questions, Kayla, but thanks for trying!)

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: beezzer

My question was, do you approve of people saying whatever they want, even if it pisses you off, or do you want them to "shut up" if what they say pisses you off? Which is it? It's an honest question.

Telling someone to shut up, is different from not allowing them to speak.

I guess I'm not free to tell someone to shut up.

Is that what you're telling me?

But do you really want them to shut up? Really? If an atheist told a Christian to shut up, you would bash the atheist's treatment of the Christian, saying he was being disrespectful of the Christian's opinion. You are certainly free to tell someone to shut up, but don't be surprised by the accusation of hypocrisy.

You speak of freedoms and respect of others beliefs.

WHERE ARE YOUR POSTS DEFENDING CHRISTIAN RIGHTS?

Christians have the right to believe whatever they want. They don't have the right to act on those beliefs when it takes away someone else's rights. Gays are citizens who have a civil right to participate in this society, and that includes having the same access to public accommodation that everyone else has.

If an atheist had a business, and he said that because of his beliefs, he refused to sell his products to Christians - I would say the same thing to the atheist. Christians, as citizens, have the civil right to participate in this society, and that includes having the same access to public accommodation that everyone else has.

But the people in question did nothing to anyone.

If someone publicly says, "I will kill the President the next chance I get", do the authorities just ignore it because he hasn't done anything yet? Extreme example, I realize, but my point is, if someone publicly announces that they WILL refuse service to a group because of who that group is, you gotta expect some response. Not saying I 100% agree with the specific response, but I'm certainly not surprised that there was one.

There was a time not so long ago in the US where people were blacklisted and punished for certain beliefs--not actually doing anything, mind you--but for simply having a belief system that was not popular. This was call "McCarthyism." Do we really want to go back to those times?

We're not just talking about a belief. We are talking about someone saying that they WILL ACT on that belief.
If the Christian owner said that he/she personally was against gay marriage, but he/she will do business with them because he/she will not mix business with personal belief -- I highly doubt you would see the public backlash we are seeing now.

If someone said that they were a communist AND that they would participate in a war against the U.S. and democracy - that's a little different than saying they believe in communist principles but had no intention of doing anything about it.

So office of pre-crime then is it? Got it.

Did the government arrest or fine/penalize the pizza owner for a crime?

Not yet, thank Odin.

But the slavering and hysterical pitchforks and torches mob certainly has condemned them for doing absolutely nothing.

a reply to: undo

Those in the study who concluded a hypothetical thief must have been both a teacher AND an atheist or rapist.

www.scientificamerican.com...

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Everyone is just doing their own thing.

Isn't that what you always preach?

I can also, by the same token, criticize the motivations of those doing so and point out the hypocrisy of their behavior, the fine examples of "tolerance" they are.

OTOH, the death threats and threats of violence these people have been getting based on this manufactured outrage are indeed illegal.

You want hypocrisy?

Let an atheist business speak up.

They should if they want to. I think they have every right to do what they want and, if fact, have on several occasions.

Not the point.

I've been on all sides.

I've been Christian - - I've been atheist.
I've been Republican - - I've been non-affiliated.
I've lived in Right Wing Arizona - - I've lived in liberal Los Angeles.
I've worked for large corporations - - I've worked for small companies - - I've owned my own small business.
I've worked in religious environments - - I've worked in predominately LGBT environments.

Fundy Christians are arrogant and think they are in charge. That everyone should bow down to them. They're not.

I have no sympathy for Fundy Christians not allowed to discriminate.

LOL! Have you "found" yourself yet!?

Fundy Christians (as you put it) do seem to be confident in their beliefs, but I have never met one that wants anyone to bow down to them. Their discrimination is fine with me. I just prefer they not be hateful bigots like some.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Everyone is just doing their own thing.

Isn't that what you always preach?

I can also, by the same token, criticize the motivations of those doing so and point out the hypocrisy of their behavior, the fine examples of "tolerance" they are.

OTOH, the death threats and threats of violence these people have been getting based on this manufactured outrage are indeed illegal.

You want hypocrisy?

Let an atheist business speak up.

So your morality is based on what someone else does? If someone steals from you then you are justified in stealing from someone else? That's not logical. One cannot point out someone else's hypocrisy to justify their won. Neither should by hypocrites.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Everyone is just doing their own thing.

Isn't that what you always preach?

manufactured outrage

You are kidding? People all over the World are outraged, folk on ATS are outraged. This is not "Manufactured". The US is meant to be the leader of the free world, and yet we are seeing a complete ignorance towards the constitution. Religion and state are supposed to be seperate and yet we have relgious groups lobbying state governors imposing relgious laws on to society.

If this law stands, then this will backfire. Just wait till a town/city has a big enough Muslium community with fundamentalist within that community imposing Shaira law. White college girl goes out for a drink in the evening and a group of young Muslium men demand she "covers up" and gets home and not to be seen out alone again. BTW this is already happening in London Suburbs, and there's no religious protection law in the UK like the bill imposed in Indiana.

Would this be acceptable to ATS members who currently think the whole outrage has been manufactured?

originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: TonyS

I refuse to change. Come what may. If I stop posting suddenly, you'll know what happened.

You brought up an interesting point. In practically every business I enter in my state there's the sign: "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". I always assumed that applied to the business owner reserving the right to refuse service to trouble makers or people of offensive odor or bizarre appearance.

The t.v. report on the legislation clarification stated that now in Indiana, business owners will no longer be able to refuse service to anyone regardless, I suppose, of anything.

Strange times.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

*snip*

But the slavering and hysterical pitchforks and torches mob certainly has condemned them for doing absolutely nothing.

Breaking radio silence for a quick minute (I have one coming, LOL) weren't you just complaining elsewhere here recently in regard to the same issue about "overreaction" on the part of those who were concerned about the IRFRA being misused?

"slavering and hysterical pitchforks and torches mob" isn't just a tad overractive, Doc?

C'mon. The "mob" has a right to free speech as well, don't they?

One person's mob is another person's patriots and freedom fighters, yes?

Perspective is all.

Gryphon out.

originally posted by: NavyDoc


Punishing the group you don't like simply because the pendulum has swung to your side is a dangerous precedent, IMHO.

Punishing LGBT group because you have an archaic belief, but ignore divorce, adultery, etc.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Everyone is just doing their own thing.

Isn't that what you always preach?

I can also, by the same token, criticize the motivations of those doing so and point out the hypocrisy of their behavior, the fine examples of "tolerance" they are.

OTOH, the death threats and threats of violence these people have been getting based on this manufactured outrage are indeed illegal.

You want hypocrisy?

Let an atheist business speak up.

So your morality is based on what someone else does? If someone steals from you then you are justified in stealing from someone else? That's not logical. One cannot point out someone else's hypocrisy to justify their won. Neither should by hypocrites.

I've seen the hypocrisy. That's all.

And Yes, I can point to it. "David and Goliath"