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.

 

Left Hypocrisy on Serve / No Serve; Don't Tell Me 'Both Sides Do It'

page: 1
40
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+22 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:09 AM
link   
we all know about the pizza restaurant and the bakery that got in trouble for refusing to do gay weddings.

the left / media mercilessly condemned them and wanted them punished.

now a bunch of entertainers are refusing to provide service to the Trump inauguration, including now a member of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.
www.sltrib.com...


For the singer, it is a moral issue, she wrote. "I only know I could never 'throw roses to Hitler.' And I certainly could never sing for him."

Chamberlin, who said she has been with the choir for five years, did not respond to interview requests and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints declined to comment on her status in the famed group or on how many others might have dropped out or complained.


so why is it wrong for a baker or pizza maker to deny service according to their moral/religious code, but perfectly acceptable for an entertainer to refuse to perform?

consider this; the baker and pizza maker faced legal punishment for their decisions.
no entertainer is experiencing any fallout for refusing.

because the left in this country is authoritarian and willing to bring the full force of the government and legal system against those who disagree.
no conservative is even thinking about legally punishing performers.

so don't tell me left/right republican/democrat are the same. they are most certainly not.

I don't think it's right to compel a performer to perform involuntarily. I just wish the left would extend the same courtesy to those operating from a religious motivation.
edit on 31-12-2016 by ElGoobero because: clarify



+24 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:15 AM
link   
The difference is, the entertainers aren't discriminating against Trump because of his race, nationality or his sexual orientation. They are refusing to deal with him because of his actions and comments.

The left doesn't have a problem with a baker or pizza maker turning away someone who comes in with obnoxious, unruly and disruptive behavior. That is a perfectly legitimate reason to refuse service to someone.



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:17 AM
link   
I mostly agree with you.

One proviso though.

I think there's a huge difference between witholding goods or services from ordinary people and doing the same for the government or individual politicians you dislike.

I can't imagine a pro life church choir being happy about singing for a pro abortion governor for example and they oughtnt to be forced to perform.


+28 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

They did not refuse to serve a gay customer, they refused to participate in a gay wedding. Had a gay person come in to buy a cake for a straight wedding there is no indication they would have been refused.

Both Trump and the gay wedding are examples of refusal due to moral beliefs. The left has simply decided they are the ones to decide morality, and you must adhere to their moral beliefs.


+8 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: SprocketUK
I can't imagine a pro life church choir being happy about singing for a pro abortion governor for example and they oughtnt to be forced to perform.

The OP argument is not that they should .. it's that the left picks and chooses when a person's moral beliefs are valid and when they need to be forced. The right seems to say when a person's moral beliefs are involved, let them refuse.

Although imo the baker was more in the right. They were not refusing to serve a customer, it was refusal to participate in a gay wedding that made them refuse, there is no indication the people themselves were refused service across the board. These people are refusing to provide service to Trump under any circumstance.
edit on 31-12-2016 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)


+11 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
The difference is, the entertainers aren't discriminating against Trump because of his race, nationality or his sexual orientation. They are refusing to deal with him because of his actions and comments.
in other words, his political beliefs.


The left doesn't have a problem with a baker or pizza maker turning away someone who comes in with obnoxious, unruly and disruptive behavior. That is a perfectly legitimate reason to refuse service to someone.

so I can turn you away if I think you're rude, but I have to throw away my Christian/moral beliefs and support behavior I find to be ungodly? and face legal persecution if I don't comply?


+18 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero

It's okay to punish, ban, deny based on ideology, as long as it's an ideology that doesn't fall into lockstep with leftist authoritarians.

I thought you knew that.




posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:26 AM
link   

edit on 31/12/16 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)


+2 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:27 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

A gay person has the right to public accommodations, which means they have the right to buy a cake for their event, no matter what the event is.

If a gay person came in screaming and shouting obscenities and physical threats, the baker would have every right to kick them out.

Trump is not being refused because he is a straight white male. He is not being refused because he is wanting services for a specific event. He is being refused because of the horrible things he says.


+3 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: kaylaluv

They did not refuse to serve a gay customer, they refused to participate in a gay wedding. Had a gay person come in to buy a cake for a straight wedding there is no indication they would have been refused.

Both Trump and the gay wedding are examples of refusal due to moral beliefs. The left has simply decided they are the ones to decide morality, and you must adhere to their moral beliefs.


The difference is that refusing to sing at Trump's inauguration is an act of political free speech. That is constitutionally protected.

As a place of public accommodation, refusing to provide a service or goods to a paying customer because of their age, sex, religion, sexual preference, etc, is not protected.


+7 more 
posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

A gay person has the right to public accommodations, which means they have the right to buy a cake for their event, no matter what the event is.

If a gay person came in screaming and shouting obscenities and physical threats, the baker would have every right to kick them out.

Trump is not being refused because he is a straight white male. He is not being refused because he is wanting services for a specific event. He is being refused because of the horrible things he says.


Can you show me Trump kicking and screaming and shouting obscenities while asking them for their service?

Doesn't every person have the right to accommodations, no matter what the event is? Or only gay people?



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero



I just wish the left would extend the same courtesy to those operating from a religious motivation.


Courtesies be damned. The progressive left doesn't value courtesy, manners or civility for their own intrinsic sakes, rather they use them like a John uses a hooker, when and only for so long as they serve their purpose, and then toss them aside. Obfuscation, reinforcing their delusions of sophistication and superior intellect, those are the value that the progressive left sees in courtesy, civility, and manners.

No, we need to TAKE what our conscience allows to be right, without debate, without hand wringing, and without taking any further input from the progressive left into account. Marginalize them, drive them back under the rocks they were hiding under.



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
The right to be free from discrimination is, for many, an important right. At the moment we value the rights of the individual over the rights of companies/organisations. Therefore, the rights of the individuals not to be discriminated is a more important issue than the rights of a religious organisation to pick and choose which morals of their Holy Book to live by. Perhaps a company should have the right to serve who they choose, but they should also be aware that they are part of a country that values treating people equally.

On the Trump issue, the singer has every right to resign from the performance as she would be exercising her right to freedom, thought, and religion. I fail to see how she would be discriminating Trump by doing this but maybe you can enlighten me.



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:32 AM
link   
the OP is engaging in what's called "false equivalency".....the right has been doing this for a long time.



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: kaylaluv

They did not refuse to serve a gay customer, they refused to participate in a gay wedding. Had a gay person come in to buy a cake for a straight wedding there is no indication they would have been refused.

Both Trump and the gay wedding are examples of refusal due to moral beliefs. The left has simply decided they are the ones to decide morality, and you must adhere to their moral beliefs.


The difference is that refusing to sing at Trump's inauguration is an act of political free speech. That is constitutionally protected.

As a place of public accommodation, refusing to provide a service or goods to a paying customer because of their age, sex, religion, sexual preference, etc, is not protected.


There is no evidence they refused a customer because of their preference. They refused the wedding, not the person. If a gay person wanted a cake and the person was refused, I would agree. The PERSON was not refused though, the EVENT was refused.



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: twfau

So singing for Trump is supporting him, and you should be able to not support him.
Baking a cake for a gay wedding is supporting that gay wedding, but you have no right to not support gay weddings.



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

You are talking about one specific case. I am speaking generally.



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: twfau
The right to be free from discrimination is, for many, an important right. At the moment we value the rights of the individual over the rights of companies/organisations. Therefore, the rights of the individuals not to be discriminated is a more important issue than the rights of a religious organisation to pick and choose which morals of their Holy Book to live by.

it's not about a 'religious organization', it's about an individual business owner and his/her moral/religious code.


Perhaps a company should have the right to serve whom they choose, but they should also be aware that they are part of a country that values treating people equally.

On the Trump issue, the singer has every right to resign from the performance as she would be exercising her right to freedom, thought, and religion. I fail to see how she would be discriminating Trump by doing this but maybe you can enlighten me.

'I won't serve you because you're a conservative'. how is that not discrimination?



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Just out of curiosity can anyone show me a list of the racist things Trump said against black people during his campaign?



posted on Dec, 31 2016 @ 07:38 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Because that one case rallied the left. If THEY agree with the event .. you must serve it. If they do not agree with the event, you are free to decline. It's hypocrisy.

I completely agree you should not be able to discriminate against a person, but you should be able to discriminate against an event that is morally objectionable to you.

So you must provide a cake to a customer even if he is gay.
You do not need to provide a cake for a gay wedding, whether the customer is straight or gay.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join