"Ex-Muslims of Nth America" Refused Cake Order from Wegmans bakery

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Hecate666

I was just explaining why every little muslim story makes it into the papers. No more, no less.

Oh, came across as excuses to me.

If you did understand the Cave reference, you would understand 99% of the news "stories" are just that.

You know it would be really great if you actually read what I wrote instead of going on about Plato's cave [well done for reading it, here is a pad on the head for that]. If you had read what I wrote in my OP and then again in my answer to you, you should see that I am fully aware of what to believe and what not to believe. I was also telling you about personal experiences, you know, the stuff that happened to myself, which I know is true. These experiences also show me that not everything ever written in any newspaper is always a lie.

Had you read what I wrote, you would have noticed that I included your belief that muslims can do no wrong and never will and are absolutely no problem whatsoever to anybody is just as inane as to believe that all muslims are [include what you wish].

>>>>>>>>Which means I am fully aware that extremes in both directions [note I say BOTH] are wrong.

a reply to: Hecate666

These experiences also show me that not everything ever written in any newspaper is always a lie.

They always mix in a little truth, yes.

It works on you, apparently.

MAn, I wrote much more and it's now gone and didn't publish.

Basically I am asking you to read my posts properly before commenting and telling me once more that you read Plato's cave [I am very impressed by that, so no need to mention it again].
I said:

BOTH extreme views are wrong.

a) To believe that there is absolutely no problem whatsoever with islam

and

b) All muslims are...

Am I wrong to think the truth is somewhere in the middle? If so could you clear that up for me please.
Also it comes across as if you are saying that your opinion is infallible and 100% right. For someone who keeps going on about Plato's cave that makes no sense to me.

Just do me a favour and not only read but try and understand what I said, before commenting as I am getting tired of repeating myself.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Hecate666

These experiences also show me that not everything ever written in any newspaper is always a lie.

They always mix in a little truth, yes.

It works on you, apparently.

Yeah, I totally believe what I read all the time [rolleye].
Because you know me so well and have read all my posts.

The baseline is that you are trying to tell me that newspaper are lying to people to make muslims worse than they are. Correct?

And I am telling you that people don't just go by news articles, they also have personal experiences and when an article matches their experiences, then for all intents and purposes that experience happened and it is being published.

It would be smashing of you could re-read my OP, seriously, I think you skipped it for certain words and then got somehow into defense mode.

Is your opinion 100% correct? If so please explain what makes you so superior to others with personal experience that matches the news. [and don't mention the cave please].

a reply to: Hecate666

The baseline is that you are trying to tell me that newspaper are lying to people to make muslims worse than they are. Correct?

No, to get you to focus on Islam instead of the reality of global domination. Just like Hitler did with the Jews.

So theres that.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Hecate666

The baseline is that you are trying to tell me that newspaper are lying to people to make muslims worse than they are. Correct?

No, to get you to focus on Islam instead of the reality of global domination. Just like Hitler did with the Jews.

So theres that.

OK, now your bringing out your Hitler card. Do I really have to tell you that these are two completely different situations?
Were the Spanish wrong to have defended themselves aginst islam too? [goo.gl...]

I am done here, it's like talking to a [not very knowledgeable] wall. I can't see the point. Lets just agree to disagree [big time].

a reply to: Hecate666

OK, now your bringing out your Hitler card.

Every Empire in History blames some sect or people or culture to unjustly warrant conquest for gain. Rome used the Christians for their justification.

Not just religious and not just cultures, whatever was needed to get people on board for invasion (excuse me "Intervention") in the early stages.

In Iraq, it was WMD and Regime Change, remember? Not Islam. It since turned there because its hard to find a real enemy that justifies the full might of a military superpower, isn't it? Over and again? How many countries has NATO invaded so far, how may more are being pushed upon, currently?

So Islamist Xtremist Jihadist will do as long as its spun over and again to whip peoples allegiance to a frenzy in the Middle East.

You claim you don't see that going on and ridicule others for recalling rhyming history.

Good for you.

a reply to: stosh64

I think that this should be tittle Only in America reverse phycology is allowed

When I read this type of news I just have to laugh.

Only in America people

originally posted by: tommo39
a reply to: Abysha

sell pork.

Yes..Yes, as an ex-muslim i absolutely love BARBI pork...

And the irony in the fact Wegmans sells pork, and is not worried about offending employees is not lost.

Honestly, if Wegmans were a privately owned business run by a devout muslim who held to a faith that said 'you shall not provide service for an apostate' then I'd have to agree with the owner's decision.

They've got the 'privately owned' part covered, but not the devout faith. Not wanting to upset your workers is not enough of a reason to deny services.

a reply to: NthOther

I hear gun stores are doing ok...

SPAM removed by admin

How many times does this need to be explained?..Honestly 3 pages and posters the KNOW BETTER keep fanning the flames.

Lets start with the technical explanation.

In these types of cases, there are two types of privately owned businesses.

1. Open to the public. If ones business is open to the general public, then said business has to follow discrimination laws. The right to serve/not serve is limited to a patrons actions, not who they are.

2. Not open to the public. This type of business requires some kind of membership, like a club. People cannot simply walk in and purchase/contract your goods/service. In this scenario the business can basically discriminate all they want and have absolute freedom to serve/not serve within the terms of their membership contract.

The whole cake issue in this case and I am sure will be mentioned the gay couple cake, was about discriminating based on who the customers were, not about the product itself.
If the same product was ordered by somebody who was not "ex-muslim" or in the other case heterosexual, both businesses would not have a problem making/selling the product.

Why must this be repeated EVERY FRICKIN TIME THIS ISSUE COMES UP? What is so hard about understanding this?

Then again, who am I kidding? The hate fest will continue and drown out any reasonable explanation, pretty much par for the course on ATS as of late. The reason I even bother to hit the reply button is because I typed this out and do not want to feel it was a complete waste of time, but I am sure the posts that follow will prove that wrong.