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.

 

Your Selective Bigotry

page: 7
30
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2015 @ 11:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

They refused to bake any cake.


That's a lie. The couple were regular costumers of the Kleins. So as Chaos pointed out, they weren't refused service based on their sexual orientation.




posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Seriously after all the time this story came out its not about the cake? Plz stop watching fox news



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 12:27 AM
link   
OP.....Nice Thread

You pointed out something I hadn't realized on page 1.

"They have weaponized the word "Racist". I find truth in that statement.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 01:18 AM
link   
I agree with the OP. And despite the moans from the increasingly hypocritical left, bigotry is bigotry regardless.

The script goes : "Love group a, but hate group b for not loving group a"....that's literally the concept stripped down.

"Selective bigotry": Typical leftist nonsense.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969

Plz stop watching fox news


That's part of the problem with you... folks. You look at someone's position on a particular subject and seem to think you have the ability to deduce all kinds of things about that person from that one position.

For your information, I don't watch Fox news, nor do I read Breitbart, or any other publication that you think is somehow influencing me to disagree with you. Believe it or not, many of us really are capable of thinking for ourselves.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Maverick1



I agree with the OP. And despite the moans from the increasingly hypocritical left, bigotry is bigotry regardless.

The script goes : "Love group a, but hate group b for not loving group a"....that's literally the concept stripped down.

"Selective bigotry": Typical leftist nonsense.


I do not understand this left vs. right labels. I find it nonsense and in fact only see it come up here on this site. It's an American thing....often unconsciously projected without pausing to question if the concept goes beyond one's own society.

I agree a bigot is a bigot, but the degree and variables of thought greatly differs.

Some people who 'hate" for ignorant reasons seem to find comfort placing everybody into their tiny box.



And despite the moans from the increasingly hypocritical left..


WTH does that mean?! How the hell did this social engineered mindset of casting someone into a group through using a label such as "left or right" ever come to be?

This abstract ideology is flung around as if it is an actual concrete thing....by grown arse people!

These people do not exercise their freewill....pawns of effect is what they are.

I'm bigoted against people like that as well...
edit on 11-7-2015 by Involutionist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

I suggest you read up on the case.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Bone75

I suggest you read up on the case.


The actual case or what the LGBT brigade have turned it into?



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Either since they're one and the same.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

I want 'fair'.

It's a dance to arrive at that. One step forward-sidewiays-backward and then twirl. When folks think that everything needs to be settled right now, they argue against who and what we are.

Disputation, competition, limited knowledge, minor league smarts grounded in unfounded opinion is how a large, perhaps overwhelming percentage, proceed through their existence. This can be mirrored by 'neo-thises and thates', but usually the conservative logic is the loosest.

So with a tight grip on reasoning, constant reading and an ability to demonstrate why I hold a position, I rebuke the dopes who use faith, hope, feelings and beliefs to confirm who they are and the what and why of the nonsense they NEED to express.

Note: I hold positions. Positions can be changed. A better set of facts, superior logic, irrefutable history will change my mind. If you do otherwise, you become irrelevant to me as a source of worthy thought.

As an example, virgin birth. Run that thought through it's paces. God comes down and makes a baby. He's actually sort of taking advantage of a dude's wife (another nifty piece right here!), even though he's all into that covet thing. The child is appreciated as god. There is only one god. Which means god did what to his mom?
Reminds me of Trump's comments about his daughter, ugh.

In actuality, you do not need to an alien probe to discover the depth of disingenuousity perpetuated by these 'thinkers'. The DEVOTION to these formulations, these constructs of control, is done by those willing to be externally programmed meat robots.
This wouldn't be so bad but higher intelligences and moral acmes actually granted them the RIGHT TO SAY DUMB STUFF AND THAT IT WOULD BE AS VALUABLE AS RATIONAL INPUT BY THOSE NOT SAYING DUMB STUFF. These same people tend (note qualifier) to love hierarchies of a private nature but despise societal ones. (Masons/Churches/Corpserations are good, government bad.) The only agency that can allow the freedoms they like is the one they most hate.

I have the right to carry a gun so therefore I will display it in the grocery store. (Ever wonder if a criminal wouldn't just shoot the wearers of that bulging badge of honor first? The don't have to draw, just plug 'em.) I want my religious freedom so I can act badly toward those who do NOT believe as I do.

After a while, it's boring to have a discussion with those whose major themes are, "Me, MINE, you have something and it should be mine. I didn't give you permission to be that way or to say those things. Let's go kill somebody we never met because they are different. I was here first, screw everybody else. Who is going to provide for my family when I am gone? How can I control the future after I passed?"

It is a terribly trifling way to approach your dirt bath.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Kali74

I'm very familiar with the case and I think what the bakers went through is far more disgusting and inhumane than anything those lesbians have or will ever encounter.



posted on Jul, 11 2015 @ 02:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

Elaborate then...



posted on Jul, 12 2015 @ 01:02 AM
link   
The only truth ive come across on these forums.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 04:48 AM
link   
New liberalism is entirely cultish in its behavior. I can hardly tell a difference between it and an extreme religion. How would i know what cultish behavior looks like? I grew up in one. Both consider anyone who isnt in lock step with their dogma to be heretical. One side will beat you with a bible and call you a deviant or servant of satan. The other will ostracize you and call you a racist or bigot, for anything you disagree with - doesnt matter the subject. And for folks that actually think for themselves, you get called all the above, which doesnt make a lick of sense.

I call bullsh*t.

Heres the deal. Dont tell me what to think. Im fed up with all these mindless masses of sanctimonious hypocrites trying to pound me into submission. Dont even try it. I am done with this psychological manipulation and twisted realities where people think they get to decide what I think. I give people respect to be and think for themselves and i demand the same in return.

The liberal hordes of this new neo-liberal religion disgust me the same way that religious hate mongers disgust me. The truth is they are entirely the same kind of delusional fanatic.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

The verdict was yes but the payout was much higher because of the behavior of the bakery owners after the coupe filed the discrimination complaint.


The bureau found the Kleins liable for the threats made by others against the couple and awarded them to pay “$60,000 in damages to Laurel Bowman-Cryer and $75,000 in damages to Rachel Bowman-Cryer for emotional suffering.”


Raw Story

Also this:


From the Final Order:
“This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage. It is about a business’s refusal to serve
someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.

Within Oregon’s public accommodations law is the basic principle of human decency that every
person, regardless of their sexual orientation, has the freedom to fully participate in society. The
ability to enter public places, to shop, to dine, to move about unfettered by bigotry.”


Link


But does this law conflict with the Constitution's 1st AD? That is the question that will be coming up very soon in many places. Can you force a person to do something that violates their religion?

My understand is that the couple HAD bought things at the store before without any issues. The problem came about because of the wedding. By making the wedding cake they would be directly tied to the wedding and as such felt that this was going beyond the bound that their religion allowed.

I see this cases going up to the Fed level very soon.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 06:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: ProfessorChaos

originally posted by: reldra
No. You are not "intolerant" if you won't accept bigots or bigotry-related concern trolling or apologia about what is truly tolerant and what is not when you meet hate. That ship has sailed."


I hope that the inherent hilarity of stating that being intolerant of behaviors that you do not agree with doesn't make you "intolerant", hasn't escaped the eyes of those reading the post quoted above.

Obvious logical fallacy is obvious.


Because I do not tolerate bigotry does not make me intolerant. I would have to not tolerate for no reason at all and for random things.

Let's say you don't like swearing in your home. You do not tolerate it and you tell people who use an expletive on the spot, that you do not tolerate it. That does not make you intolerant in general.


Not tolerating something makes you intolerant of it. This should not be a difficult concept to grasp.


Yes, of IT. The one thing. Like the example of others using expletives in one;s home.

Following your logic of "being a bigot of a bigot doesn't make you a bigot...it makes you right" is the same as saying "the killer of a killer is not a killer". I just don't see how you don't get this? It literally baffles me.


LOL

But remember there are no killers only "socially maladjusted biological removal units"




posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 06:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
I haven't seen anyone who hates Christians here


Bullocks. I see plenty of people mocking/bullying Christians or anyone of any faith. Maybe you refuse to see it because you agree with those doing the mocking.




It is a sad and backwards time when the defenders of the oppressed are called bigots. This is a twisted concept the right wing has invented. Or maybe it's just right wing media that ahas invented it. I am not sure whom, but they are pandering to a certain segment of the population.


It's like I'm listening to an MSNBC interview of Clinton, Very pathetic that you'd pull the victim card here lol.





I have seen people say things like 'I don't believe in your imaginary sky God, so that doesn't pertain to me'. I have seen Christians say things on the same level of dismissivness. Believe me, if I saw a Christian insulted for no other reason and in a mean way, I would call out the jerk. You don't know me very well. You haven't seen my contributions to serene religious discussions either, it appears. I am not an atheist.

I rarely watch the MSM and have not seen an interview of Hilary Clinton in at least 2 years.

Pulling the victim card would mean that I am saying I am a victim.

You are at least confused and assume too much.


You must not read a lot of post here.

I see it all the time.

"Conservation Christian Bigot" seems to be a common term in a lot of threads if you disagree with a post.

I also see a "right wing religious nuts" or similar many times. Now that may refer to other religions then Christians, but if I had to bet on it would put a few dollars down.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 06:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ProfessorChaos

They refused to bake any cake.


That's a lie. The couple were regular costumers of the Kleins. So as Chaos pointed out, they weren't refused service based on their sexual orientation.


Don't include facts you'll confuse the augment.



posted on Jul, 14 2015 @ 09:17 PM
link   

edit on 14-7-2015 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join