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.

 

Florida’s New Anti-Gay, Anti-Woman Bill May Be the Most Malicious Yet

page: 23
39
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 11:25 PM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

I would bet you one night of my Tips that Trans Women and Man could come in your store and you would never know they are Trans...

Besides that, lets see... how many "Terrorist Attacks" were committed by Trans People? how many Mass Murders?




posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 11:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

well thats why I stay armed buddy, because I did in fact make that very point in the post you responded to. As well you should not trust me, or anyone you dont know. Luckily I am in retail, not child or pet care. And when you buy direct from China like me, you can afford to sell things with an even lower price tag than wal-mart and still make at least 200-500% per unit or more, religious or bigoted beliefs be damned.

Remember poor people dont care about politics or religion, just an affordable price tag and they will damn near put up with anything. The first person I ban hammered from my store decided to throw on a bikini and show off his *assets* for lack of a better word and protest my shop with some friends and a sign. They were ridiculed, had a couple of people throw stuff at them, and actually helped bring in more customers
for that day.

Eventually the police were called to ask them to leave because of too many complaints of how they looked and the fact they would harass anyone who walked towards my store. Police asked me if I wanted t do something, I said let them express their Constitutionally guaranteed rights and just smiled for the rest of the day. Oh har har, that was one helluva entertaining day. Maybe they should just waste their time on other matters.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 11:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

For me a man that says he is a woman and just dresses in drag but has no operations or hormone treatments is simply a cross dresser or drag artist. And vica versa for women.

I define trans as someone who has actually undergone medical procedure to mutilate the natural organs they were scientifically born with in order to satisfy some inner confusion that they were actually born opposite becdause that is how they feel.

If you are plain as day a man, even if you dress up and wear make up, but say you are a woman is not being trans to me and most of the people of traditional male/female would agree. Thats just being a confused man that dresses up and wears makeup, or drag. Same goes for the other side. Lady is not a man just because they want people to accept it and believe a scientific inaccuracy.

When I lost a job for refusing to address a man as miss or maam, I simply opened up my own shop, and came back and thanked the management for doing me a favor.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

well thats why I stay armed buddy

Are we buddies? I don't believe in compulsory friendship. Just like I don't believe in compulsory love. That's for the religious.


Remember poor people dont care about politics or religion

I was not aware of that...


The first person I ban hammered from my store decided to throw on a bikini and show off his *assets* for lack of a better word and protest my shop with some friends and a sign.

For my own curiosity what were they protesting? What event transpired prior?
edit on 30-10-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist
It seems your logic is that 'mutilating' ones body with medical procedures is predictive of violent tendency and mental instability.

So how would this not also apply to say women that have breast augmentation? Do you think women who were "violent" to their breasts are necessarily potential violent criminals? If not, why not?
edit on 30-10-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

will reply in private post to avoid thread drift.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:30 AM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

You avoided my Question, how many "Terrorist Attacks" and Mass Murder have been Trans people?

And again, i would bet a Night of my Tips that Trans people could walk into your store after Surgery and you still would never be able to tell

Was there any reports of the Protest at your store? Local News Article i could read?



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

not rely nobody seemed to pay it any attention. Of course this was in the good ol Bush era, oh how I miss a Republican presidency. Its not as if news camera came and reporters called to ask questions. Viral was still becoming a term and had not become the source of Dino medias nightly briefs. Honestly most people, the cops included did not much care to see this man dressed the way he was with the alterations to his body on display.

And darth, I have never been fooled and I never will. In person and digital pictures are two different ball games. As far as terrorists. Well I dont recall a media report specifically citing trans guilty of terrorism. But I will remain vigilante for such activity.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

Well shoot I want to know that answer too. Is anyone with plastic surgery not allowed in your store?



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

I'm willing to bet a lot that Trans people could pass in front of you and you would have no knowledge of it...

Well i'm sure America is safe knowing you are "Vigilante" against "Trans Terrorist Attacks"



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 01:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Of course not, he doesn't Discriminate, anyone who Mutilates their Body wouldn't be allowed Trans or a Cisgender Woman with Breast Implants ... right?



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

I am not sure what exactly a cisgender is?? Why is it every year the community has to suddenly add a new classification or sub-genre of gay? And what the hell is the Q+ supposed to mean man??

I swear that community of people break yourselves down into more categories than the IRS has for corporate tax breaks.

is the acronym going to be longer than the alphabet by the time my kids grow into adulthood??

Well since the only ones of us left even responding in this thread are not really specifically discussing the legislation, myself included due to constantly having to reply to direct questions on MY personal beliefs, I will just drop out of this one. I'll be more than happy to address any private messages in regards to my controversial constitutionally protected beliefs, but I think this record has spun around for its last song now.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

Well I dont recall a media report specifically citing trans guilty of terrorism. But I will remain vigilante for such activity.

Translation:

I have absolutely zero evidence to support my claim that transgenders are more prone to violence than other people but I will continue to guard my shop from my paranoid delusions.



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 02:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy


hey as long as im being honest right?



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 02:23 AM
link   
a reply to: AmericanRealist

I'll be more than happy to address any private messages in regards to my controversial constitutionally protected beliefs

This bill is unconstitutional. Just so you know. That's not up for controversy.

I know you mean best, man. Truly, this bill is not for anyone that has any sense of compassion.
edit on 31-10-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

The Constitution only applies to Religion and Guns, everything else is part of an "Agenda" to take over Christian America

No one should support this Bill for the fact that it is Unconstitutional, regardless of your feelings on GLBTQ+ people



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

I still don't get where it's only aimed at that group.... it's a nice lie though, something that probably well over 50% of the population either would agree with or not care enough about to raise a stink about it...all the while not realizing that this bill would more than likely extend much farther than what the media is claiming and sooner or later affect them also.
consider for a moment, if an adoption agency can refuse a gay couple because of their belief, what would stop them from refusing a christian couple because they have the belief that well.....they will just brainwash the kid and screw up their lives with fairty tails and myths??? we hear it all the times on ATS, people claiming this exact same thing, and well how many times are claims made that the gov't and society is out to extinguish christianity, or are labeling them as "terrorists" ect......
I think that there is just as much chance that things could swing the way I am seeing them swinging as there is that they would swing in the way that the christians would want them to....
but well, whatever..... I'm old enough now that well, I don't have to worry about getting pregnant, have no desire to adopt a kid, and I have no intention of getting into another relation, gay or straight, so what do I care.... I'll probably be dead before we reach the end of this happy trip through crazyland....



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 08:45 PM
link   
So? What's wrong with "moral" conviction? Are you upset by people with higher standards than you? They should digress to your level? At least they have a "conviction".



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: murphy22

while a hospital's administration might decide that the moral thing to do is let nature take it's course when a complication occurs in the prengnacy, the doctor who is actually providing the treatment might feel that it's moral to intervene and not risk the mother's life....
we each have our own gauge of "morality"



posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

I (and others) brought up that point as well, this could affect everyone. Laws like this are created for a specific "Group" in mind, but could be applied to everyone



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 20  21  22    24 >>

log in

join