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: 20
40
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

Nope. No hypocrisy here.

Muslim baker refuses to decorate with words that are offensive to them - okay.

Christian baker refuses to decorate with words that are offensive to them - okay.

Same same.

Muslim baker refuses to sell generic wedding cake to gay couple - bad.

Christian baker refuses to sell generic wedding cake to gay couple - bad.

Same same.


So you MUST agree the following would be ok:
A white man walks into a bakery and asks for a wedding cake with the words "Michael loves Michelle" written on it. Cake is made.
A black woman walks into a bakery and asks for a wedding cake with the words "Shanice loves Tryone" written on it. She is politely refused.

Obvious discrimination, but as the baker was asked to write some words, no problem. Right?




posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth



Given that most bespoke services don't have catalogues, your logic is falling down

I am not familiar with that so I can't comment on that.



A white man walks into a bakery and asks for a wedding cake with the words "Michael loves Michelle" written on it. Cake is made. A black woman walks into a bakery and asks for a wedding cake with the words "Shanice loves Tryone" written on it. She is politely refused.


How about "I HATE my wife. I want to kill her!" or "Assassinate Trump!". Or perhaps several figurines doing different sex positions? Or Trump sucking on a dildo? Will you try to force the bakeries to do that for you that are not part of their service?



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: UKTruth



Given that most bespoke services don't have catalogues, your logic is falling down

I am not familiar with that so I can't comment on that.



A white man walks into a bakery and asks for a wedding cake with the words "Michael loves Michelle" written on it. Cake is made. A black woman walks into a bakery and asks for a wedding cake with the words "Shanice loves Tryone" written on it. She is politely refused.


How about "I HATE my wife. I want to kill her!" or "Assassinate Trump!". Or perhaps several figurines doing different sex positions? Or Trump sucking on a dildo? Will you try to force the bakeries to do that for you that are not part of their service?


That was not the question.
We're dealing with non offensive words.
Try again. Think hard. (HINT: there is no way out of the corner you are in)
edit on 2/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

No you think again. The cake decoration is a "volunteer" service. Meaning they do not have to do it if they don't want to. No discrimination there. Of course I agree with you that they would be bigoted if they didn't want to do the decoration for gay people but that is their right. Unless we pass a law against that.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

what if the owner of the bakery decides that their employees have to place tom loves jerry on the cakes, something which the employee has a problem doing..
or if the owner decides that the employee has to deny that person, but the employee feels that is needlessly cruel and therefore would be wrong to do?
or if a hospital decides that their employees have to assist in emergency abortions but some of those employees feel that is wrong..
and another hospital decides there just won't be any abortions, and the employees think it's needlessly endangering lives and therefore is wrong.
can you guess which ones in this list has even a chance of being protected by laws and which ones aren't??

the rights that have been granted to us through the bill or rights were granted to individuals, not businesses! so if the laws weren't already tilted to the conservative christian beliefs... all of these employees would be sharing in the same protections and they aren't!



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: UKTruth

No you think again. The cake decoration is a "volunteer" service. Meaning they do not have to do it if they don't want to. No discrimination there. Of course I agree with you that they would be bigoted if they didn't want to do the decoration for gay people but that is their right. Unless we pass a law against that.



We already established the discussion was not a legal one, way back. If it were a legal discussion we would have finished a long time ago.
I think you are now agreeing it's NOT ok for the Muslim baker to discriminate based on being asked to simply write "Michael loves Stephen" on a cake. It's bigoted, driven purely from hatred of gays. That is the right answer, and the only sensible answer, unless you are also ok with any other form of discrimination. Basically, you can't cherry pick - or you are a hypocrite.

edit on 2/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Right. A baker can refuse to decorate anything they don't want to decorate. They should offer to sell them a generic wedding cake with no writing.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: UKTruth

Right. A baker can refuse to decorate anything they don't want to decorate. They should offer to sell them a generic wedding cake with no writing.


So you are ok with both sexual and racial discrimination, then. Your only qualification is whether someone has to write something (anything) down.

Let me summarise as it amuses me to do so.

Your views, clearly stated.

A racist baker can turn away a black woman at a bakery because she wants a wedding cake with the words "Shanice loves Tyrone" on it. All ok to you.
A bigoted baker can turn away a man who asks for a cake with "Michael loves Stephen" on it. All ok to you.
A bigoted Christian baker can refuse to make a cake for a gay person. Nasty bigot to you.

Your only moral compass is whether some non offensive words were requested. Brilliant.

You are clearly morally and intellectually bankrupt. You fit right in to the SJW scene.
edit on 2/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Look, nobody is disagreeing that those people can be bigoted. We are talking about the public service and the anti-discrimination law. If it is not a part of their service, then you can not force them. Can you force a Muslim store to sell you pork. If they refuse, is that discrimination?



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: UKTruth

Look, nobody is disagreeing that those people can be bigoted. We are talking about the public service and the anti-discrimination law. If it is not a part of their service, then you can not force them. Can you force a Muslim store to sell you pork. If they refuse, is that discrimination?


No, we're not talking about the law. Read the thread.
If it were just about the law we'd have several less pages as I already agree that legally the cases are different.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Uh the OP has been debunked many times many pages ago. There's no point in discussing the OP. Is the choir still going to perform for Trump? There you go.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: UKTruth

Uh the OP has been debunked many times many pages ago. There's no point in discussing the OP. Is the choir still going to perform for Trump? There you go.


Read the thread - this specific debate was prefaced with it not being a legal discussion.
It's a moral discussion about what is right and wrong in the way that we treat each other.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

AGAIN, we are not disagreeing with you that it is morally wrong to discriminate. The fact of this matter is whether or not a service is a part of their job or not. Can you force a Muslim to sell you pork? Why or why not? Is that Muslim being bigoted towards you?



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: UKTruth

AGAIN, we are not disagreeing with you that it is morally wrong to discriminate. The fact of this matter is whether or not a service is a part of their job or not. Can you force a Muslim to sell you pork? Why or why not? Is that Muslim being bigoted towards you?


I think you jumped into an argument and played the man not the ball.

Page 18: My comment:

You are hiding behind laws kaylaluv. Laws change based on the will of the people. This discussion is far more important to have through the lens of how we want to live and communicate with each other. I am interested in what you think, not how you are legally bound to behave. The Muslim bakers in the video were offended by homosexuality and on that basis refused service. Having to write specific words is irrelevant. It would be the same service if they had to write "Mary loves Stephen", which they would do. This was a classic case of bigotry and you seem, at least, to be defending it.


The discussion is a moral one, and whilst you may agree with me (knowing that), the person I was actually having the debate with does not.
edit on 2/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

oh, I thought the discussion was about liberals are hypocrites, conservatives are practicing their constitutional rights of religious practice.... and we'll use any story and twist it till it becomes that.
anything to attack the "liberals"... right??



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Here we go round the mulberry bush......



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: UKTruth

oh, I thought the discussion was about liberals are hypocrites, conservatives are practicing their constitutional rights of religious practice.... and we'll use any story and twist it till it becomes that.
anything to attack the "liberals"... right??




No both examples are either ok, or both are not ok. There is no cherry picking. If you try to cherry pick, then yes, you are a hypocrite. The worst kind. A moral hypocrite.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: UKTruth

oh, I thought the discussion was about liberals are hypocrites, conservatives are practicing their constitutional rights of religious practice.... and we'll use any story and twist it till it becomes that.
anything to attack the "liberals"... right??




No both examples are either ok, or both are not ok. There is no cherry picking. If you try to cherry pick, then yes, you are a hypocrite. The worst kind. A moral hypocrite.


If you want to accuse someone of being a hypocrite then try those bakers. They cherry pick on which Bible verse they apply in serving people.



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: UKTruth

oh, I thought the discussion was about liberals are hypocrites, conservatives are practicing their constitutional rights of religious practice.... and we'll use any story and twist it till it becomes that.
anything to attack the "liberals"... right??




No both examples are either ok, or both are not ok. There is no cherry picking. If you try to cherry pick, then yes, you are a hypocrite. The worst kind. A moral hypocrite.


If you want to accuse someone of being a hypocrite then try those bakers. They cherry pick on which Bible verse they apply in serving people.


I dare say in both examples the bakers were hypocrites - Christian and Muslim. However, I am only laying out that they are both bigots, discriminating based on sexuality, and both exactly the same morally.

In other words... same, same

edit on 2/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2017 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: ElGoobero

They are the 'do as we say, not as we do' crowd.

The level of hypocrisy and the fact they've become the very things they claim to stand against and despise are nothing short of idiotic....Trust, but verify...and their verification fails the vast majority of the time in reality...it only stands if you let *them* dictate to you what their version of the 'facts' are.
edit on 2-1-2017 by BlackboxInquiry because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join