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.

 

HB2, North Carolina mandate to hate homosexuals.

page: 16
42
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee Then why a lawsuit if they shouldn't be forced to put anything on the cake they find offensive? Even if its Adam and Steve at the top. Do you not find it bullsh!t that someone was forced to provide a service by a judge?




posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: AVtech34
a reply to: Annee Then why a lawsuit if they shouldn't be forced to put anything on the cake they find offensive? Even if its Adam and Steve at the top. Do you not find it bullsh!t that someone was forced to provide a service by a judge?



The gay couple ordered a standard cake from their catalog.

A cake that is sold to straight couples.

They did not ask for anything different.

If a straight couple asked for something the baker found offensive - - the baker has the right to refuse.






edit on 20-4-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee I haven't been able to verify that it was just a plain cake. Why would you buy a plain cake for a wedding? There are also several different instances other than the Colorado one.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: AVtech34
a reply to: Annee I haven't been able to verify that it was just a plain cake. Why would you buy a plain cake for a wedding? There are also several different instances other than the Colorado one.



I did not say a plain cake.

I said a "standard" cake. Most bakeries keep a catalog of cake designs.

That's what the gay couple ordered. They did not request anything special.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: AVtech34

The Colorado couple didn't get the chance to order a cake. The couple entered the bakery, said they were getting married and wanted a cake to celebrate their marriage. They were summarily turned away. This is the cake they eventually got at another bakery:




posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: AVtech34

The Colorado couple didn't get the chance to order a cake. The couple entered the bakery, said they were getting married and wanted a cake to celebrate their marriage. They were summarily turned away. This is the cake they eventually got at another bakery:




Was there another one? Different state. Pretty sure there was a picture of an all white cake.

Anyway, if I baked Mickey Mouse Cakes - - they'd have to be available to everyone.

If you wanted a special rainbow Mickey Mouse Cake - - - I could refuse to do that (unless I showed one in my catalog).
edit on 20-4-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic Gay marriage was illegal in Colorado at the time. I still don't buy it was innocent, not after seeing the multiple lawsuits and how predatory they seem. Why didn't they just go back to Mass. or wherever they got married and get the cake there? Why Colorado, personally I'm indifferent to their "plight" I'm more irritated at the forced order to bake the cakes and mandatory training. I cant count how many times I've been turned away from business because I'm white when in a non white area (North Amarillo). Did I sue? no, I hiked up my big boy pants and went to another place. Where do you draw the line with these type of legal actions?



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

It's like an Adam and Eve bakery where they sell cakes with dildos on the top (it's in the catalog) for everyone. If someone asks to put a hate message on it (maybe a KKK member), they can refuse that because that isn't in their catalog. I am speaking hypothetically to make a point. If they refuse to sell what's in the catalog to Christians, then those Christians have grounds to sue.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: AVtech34
I'm more irritated at the forced order to bake the cakes and mandatory training.


Civil Rights had to be forced.

American Disability Act had to be forced.

Sucks people can't do the right thing without being forced.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Why is it insulting to say that someone who is transgender has a mental issue? It isn't saying they are crazy. Its merely observing the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria that led to gender reassignment as a treatment.


I think some of this is because it is stigmatizing and because people equate what has been deemed to be or categorized by men in suits as a psychological condition to be illness or sickness. Just look at some of the posts here stating such. If gender dysphoria or transsexualism at some point is proven to be entirely physiological, which I strongly believe it to be and what the prevailing science points to, then what becomes of the psychiatric model? It goes out the window. Think of how schizophrenia was perceived before the science was available to determine causality, for example. There's a lot of things we don't know about but still try to fit them into a frame of reference we do, whether appropriate or accurate or not. Do we consider gay and lesbian people being mentally ill or having a "mental issue"? Well, yeah, some do but most don't because our understanding of the human condition has moved beyond antiquated social or moralistic limitations and toward the realm of science and even that is rapidly evolving.


I can completely get behind the notion of "they were born this way" in the context of there being a self perception that is not typical among the rest of the human population. What I have a hard time with is, "they were born this way" in the context of it being expected to be seen as rational.


What defines us all as people and who/what we know ourselves to be is nothing but self-perception and our own internalized definition of who we are. When is it up to anyone but an individual to define themselves? Not the same, of course, but look at the perception in others you have created in the persona as being a Big Fat Furry ape-like person when indeed you may be a 5'2", 90 lb, hairless human-like person. Does your right to autonomy or self-sovereignty or self-definition or identification depend on how I define you or is that up to you? Do we define our emotions such as love in the context of being rational or fitting a particular logic? There are things that fall outside of this paradigm but yet we still accept them even if they can't be quantified, qualified or rationalized or don't fit neatly inside of a box.


In the same way a non-GD person should be understanding of the mindset that gets a person to gender reassignment, someone who undergoes such should be understanding of people who just cannot get their heads around it. It isn't a typical behavior


Someone that is not gender dysphoric will ever understand and those that are shouldn't expect that others will. Why does typicality have to do anything with it anyway? Homosexuality seems fairly common and broadly accepted that some people are just that way but that mindset only came with visibility and familiarity or in other words it is more typical than it used to be. Most queer folks don't feel the need to rationalize their otherness or define it with any logic, particularly from a heterosexual or cisgender point of view so why do you look to do this? Do people that aren't gay or trans really need to understand it beyond it just being the way some people are?


I mean, I (as someone who is fairly vocal in support of LGBT issues) end up on the short end of the stick quite often because while arguing on behalf of LGBT people I invariably say something that offends someone. Its very off putting, and doesn't really endear people to the conversation.


Believe me, I hear you on this and myself walk the thin line at times. How much of this "arguing on behalf of LGBT people" do you do in the physical realm? Lacking the nuance of expression and body language which is a vital component of communication, regardless of how eloquent or well spoken one may be with the written word, invariably there will be misunderstandings or attitudes conveyed that may not be truly representative of the intent. Other times in these online communications people are emboldened to say negative or hostile things they would never say to someone's face in person and when someone is attacked directly, as in calling transfolk mentally ill sickos, for example, it doesn't endear them either hence the defensiveness and conflict.

Good discussion, BFFT. Thought provoking and challenging and the kind of stuff I come here for. Beyond pushing and advocating for my own agenda (trans kids), I get to examine and expand my own perspectives as well in the reflections of others. There's some gooey grey stuff in my cranium. Taking it out for an exercise once and a while keeps it healthy and un-atrophied.

Woot! 400th post!



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Annee

It's like an Adam and Eve bakery where they sell cakes with dildos on the top (it's in the catalog) for everyone. If someone asks to put a hate message on it (maybe a KKK member), they can refuse that because that isn't in their catalog. I am speaking hypothetically to make a point. If they refuse to sell what's in the catalog to Christians, then those Christians have grounds to sue.


Yes.

Must sell to all.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien That would be hilarious to see at a very conservative wedding. Just a big ol floppy waving in the wind while everyone just stared horrifically at it. You could just see the bodies hitting the floor from all the up tight bible thumpers passing out.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: AVtech34

Oh man. Now that would be a sight to see!!!!!



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: AVtech34

Just as I thought - you were talking out of your rear end.

The example you provided had nothing to do with turning away homosexuals. All the Muslim bakeries were willing to bake the cake, just not decorate it in a way that was offensive to them. Nothing wrong with that.



posted on Apr, 20 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Great! Thanks McCrory and Phil Bryant. Now we even look like bigger idiots.

U.K. Issues Travel Warning About Antigay U.S. States



Laws vary from state to state. When you are physically present in a state, even temporarily, you are subject to that state’s laws. You must carry a passport showing that you have leave to enter or remain with you at all times. The US is an extremely diverse society and attitudes towards LGBT people differ hugely across the country. LGBT travellers may be affected by legislation passed recently in the states of North Carolina and Mississippi. Before travelling please read our general travel advice for the LGBT community. You can find more detail on LGBT issues in the US on the website of the Human Rights Campaign. www.advocate.com...



posted on Apr, 21 2016 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: AVtech34
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic Gay marriage was illegal in Colorado at the time.


As you know, they were already married. They wanted a cake at home to celebrate... A bakery is not charged with enforcing the law. And baking a cake would not break the law or contribute, in any way, to breaking the law. So, what's your point?



I still don't buy it was innocent


I'm not claiming it was "innocent". A business has a legal obligation to follow the law... The bakery broke the law.


I cant count how many times I've been turned away from business because I'm white when in a non white area (North Amarillo). Did I sue? no,


And that was YOUR choice. Just because someone else makes a different choice, doesn't mean squat. THEY HAD THE RIGHT.


Where do you draw the line with these type of legal actions?


I don't draw any line. In the US, if you feel your rights have been violated, you can sue... Then the law takes care of it. I am 100% supportive of people exercising their rights... You're not?

ANNEE - I don't remember any other cake, but there may have been one at their actual wedding in Mass... This is the one that came after the Colorado bakery incident. Still no dildos, two grooms, special writing (Adam and Steve) or anything like that. Just a beautifully decorated, classy cake.



posted on Apr, 21 2016 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
Great! Thanks McCrory and Phil Bryant. Now we even look like bigger idiots.

U.K. Issues Travel Warning About Antigay U.S. States


Yep, and you can bet other governments will be doing the same for their citizens.
We know it's not the whole US though. I think we tend to see the US as split into three regions: modern thinking in NY and California, a little "hit and miss" in the middle, and finally the real violent/hateful/ignorant (wouldn't want to visit there if you paid me) bigots in the south.

I wouldn't imagine that UK tourism to these states would be considerable anyway. Sure there might be some travel to the major natural landmarks and so on, but most UK citizens would not be going to the US to visit these backward little hell holes anyway, they'd be mostly going to NY.



posted on Apr, 21 2016 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Rocker2013

Fortunately, there's this:

Game-ChangingDecision for the Fight Against Anti-Trans Legislation



Today the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a precedent-setting decision for transgender high school student Gavin Grimm, resoundingly reversing a lower court decision that had held school districts can bar transgender students from using restrooms consistent with their gender identity.
...
North Carolina’s HB2 is already facing a federal lawsuit filed by Equality North Carolina, Lambda Legal, and the ACLU, which also represented Gavin Grimm. The federal district court in North Carolina, hearing that case, will now be required to follow the Fourth Circuit’s decision, since that decision is “binding precedent” on all courts within that circuit.
...
While the proposed South Carolina law would enshrine the school’s discriminatory policy into state law, the Fourth Circuit decision makes clear that the school’s actions violated Title IX. Today it is clearer than ever that these laws will not stand.



posted on Apr, 21 2016 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Hmmm.

I would have expected Gake to have more....something. Rainbows. Glitter. Something that would indicate why its Gake and not just cake.

That's just a regular old cake.




posted on Apr, 21 2016 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
Great! Thanks McCrory and Phil Bryant. Now we even look like bigger idiots.

U.K. Issues Travel Warning About Antigay U.S. States



Laws vary from state to state. When you are physically present in a state, even temporarily, you are subject to that state’s laws. You must carry a passport showing that you have leave to enter or remain with you at all times. The US is an extremely diverse society and attitudes towards LGBT people differ hugely across the country. LGBT travellers may be affected by legislation passed recently in the states of North Carolina and Mississippi. Before travelling please read our general travel advice for the LGBT community. You can find more detail on LGBT issues in the US on the website of the Human Rights Campaign. www.advocate.com...


They need to mow their own backyard and quit looking over our fence for gossip

Half of UK Muslims Want Homosexuality Banned

Is that story baloney thru and thru? Probably. Does the headline indicate a similar fascination with oppression of sexuality among their own population?





top topics



 
42
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join