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.

 

Leaked Draft of Trump’s Religious Freedom Order Reveals Sweeping Plans to Legalize Discrimination

page: 7
21
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2017 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: usernameconspiracy
Any such order would be promptly eviscerated as the trash it is by the first judge to hear a challenge. Such a wide sweeping "let's all be racist, xenophobic garbage, because it's fun" order would set the country back decades and make America an even bigger embarrassment under this moronic asshat. The he could talk about how Benjamin Franklin wasn't happy about WWII, and would have stopped it, because, you know, he's that effing ignorant of everything.

I realize the options were terrible, but people should be ashamed of having voted for this piece of human excrement.


No they should be proud to have voted for him. The shameful option was HRC, and before that, Obama.




posted on May, 4 2017 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Answering your two questions. So invading someone's privacy doesn't include a male using the women's room? That sure sounds unfair...doesn't it?

I don't know about the bathrooms you frequent, but the ones I go into have stalls in them that allow you to do whatever you want in complete privacy even IF others are standing in the bathroom.


Yes...bathroom signs indicate your born sex. That is the whole point isn't it? It has nothing to do with how you dress or what cosmetic surgery you have...it is what you are.

You're not really that stupid are you?

You misunderstood my question. But in any case, you are still wrong you aren't the ultimate authority on what gender is. Science is still up in arms about it. So pretending like signs on a wall are gospel is stupid.

You're just being silly. I have read your posts and don't always disagree with you. You aren't stupid. There are males and females and except for rarities...that is it. You are biologically one or the other. The majority of woman and men prefer to be separated by that biological difference in bathrooms when asked. It isn't a question of if you are wearing a dress or not...if you wear makeup or not...it is your biological sex which can not ever be changed. You are what you were born.

If you want to discuss gender identity...that is different. And just because an extreme minority of the population wants to occupy a different bathroom, doesn't override the original intent or the desire of the majority.

Gender isn't that simple! Explain people with XXY, XXX, XYY, or any other odd variations of chromosomal makeup. Have you ever heard the term intersex? That alone disproves the two gender concept.

But you can preach at me and give me words all day, but science disagrees with you. It is leaving you in the dust.
www.medicaldaily.com...

The scientists discovered the XX and XY cells that differentiate between genders can actually behave in different ways. When scientists took a closer look, they found not all people have cells that contain the same set of genes. Instead, it’s more like a mosaic of different unevenly divided sex cells, which biologists have taken to calling “mosaicism.” Although it’s a rare condition that only affects about 1 in 15,000 people, it still leaves an unidentified population of society outside of the familiar dichotomy.

These discoveries question the widely accepted and generally understood genders. The gonads, which are either the testicles or ovaries, are not the only gender markers. Doctors can no longer definitively look at the penis or vagina of a new baby and congratulate the birthing mother with a cheerful "it’s a boy" or "it’s a girl." Medicine’s ever-expanding understanding of the human body goes against everything we’re taught as children when it comes to our peers' private parts.

The plot thickens for babies born with ambiguous genitalia. These children grow to have intersex conditions known as the differences or disorders of sex development (DSD), and are more common than the mosaics of gender. It can lead to issues later on in their adult life, especially if their parents chose a gender for the baby before its brain is able to catch up with their decision. What if the baby's brain is of a male but his parents choose to remove the male genitalia, leaving him to grow up as a girl? Researchers say one baby out of every 100 born has some form of DSD, and with each new case comes a blurrier line of what we are as reproducing humans.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I actually know all about that. But my approach is different. Continuing with the silly bathroom concept, if there are "other" sexes and if you continue with the "bathroom for each sex" standard that has always been in place...you may choose to build more bathroom choices. What I have a problem with is the extremists fighting to overtake the others, or force them to accept a change without discussion. If there was another sex...the first consideration should be to consult the masses of how they wish to handle that...a third bathroom or a sex independent bathroom. But the third, minority sex shouldn't simply "invade" a bathroom meant for others.

The civil and respectable solution is to decide. Not to have the minority dictate their "want". Especially when (in some cases) it is for the purpose of attempting to force acceptance of their "wants" and not a logical determination of their needs.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Yeah, because Segregation TOTALLY ended because we all discussed how unfair it was for black people and everyone came to their senses and there was no racism ever again in the country.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Yeah, because Segregation TOTALLY ended because we all discussed how unfair it was for black people and everyone came to their senses and there was no racism ever again in the country.

Being silly again? Bathrooms are all about segregation. Men...women...etc. They were created for the sole purpose of segregation.

Geeez!

What do you want...your 6 year old daughter sharing a shower with a 43 year old man? Segregation isn't always a bad thing. It can serve a particular purpose...like bathrooms, showers, changing rooms, etc.
edit on 5/4/2017 by WeAreAWAKE because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
What do you want...your 6 year old daughter sharing a shower with a 43 year old man? Segregation isn't always a bad thing. It can serve a particular purpose...like bathrooms, showers, changing rooms, etc.

Again. Stalls. Why do you guys always employ such extreme slippery slopes? What's preventing a 43 year old man from walking into the shower with the 6 year old daughter now? A silly sign?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ha! The final reply of someone who can't argue a comparable. Simply force the topic down to the smallest, narrowest example possible and forget what it actually means to reality. When you decide to make a decision that affects others, those others usually wish to know the full extent of your decision.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

What is this nonsense deflection? Just answer my question. What's preventing a 43 year old man from walking into the shower with the 6 year old daughter now? A silly sign?



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No...the rule stated by the sign.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

How does a rule prevent a rule breaker from breaking the rules? I KNOW you are one of the ones who point out the silliness of "gun free" zones. I hope you know you are pitching the same argument to me since a women's restroom is TECHNICALLY a "man free" zone and a male restroom is technically a "woman free" zone. So my point here is that nothing stops these people from entering the bathrooms now and equating transgenders to perverts is very insulting to the transgenders who just want to potty in peace.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   

When a business owner denies other members of society access to public accommodations,

Public accommodations are found in government office building and other PUBLIC facilities.

Private businesses do not have PUBIC accommodations, they have PRIVATE accommodations, and yes, by god, private business owners should be able to DISCRIMINATE against anyone they damn well please, for any reason whatsoever.

If you don't like it, tough.
edit on 4-5-2017 by tanstaafl because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: SaturnFX

I love how you throw in the bull#e about how they were born. Only hermaphrodites were born with gender confusion.

Ahh, good to know you know more than scientists

Scientific American discussing different brain patterns of trans

It is unsurprising to me that someone who is mentally ill will have different brain wave patterns than those who are not mentally ill.

And for the record, I do not hate mentally ill people, I am sorry for them, and hope they find a path to wellness.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Wrong.

More specifically, the definition of a "public accommodation" can be broken down into two types of businesses/facilities:
- Government-owned/operated facilities, services, and buildings
- Privately-owned/operated businesses, services, and buildings

Government-owned/operated facilities and services. Government-owned facilities include courthouses, jails, hospitals, parks, and other places owned and operated by federal, state and local government. Government-operated services, programs, or activities provided by federal, state, or local governments include transportation systems and government benefits programs (such as welfare assistance).

Privately-owned/operated businesses and buildings. Privately-owned businesses and facilities that offer certain goods or services to the public -- including food, lodging, gasoline, and entertainment -- are considered public accommodations for purposes of federal and state anti-discrimination laws. For purposes of disability discrimination, the definition of a "public accommodation" is even more broad, encompassing most businesses that are open to the public (regardless of type).

Discrimination in Public Accommodations

This was one of the basic parts of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which ended the Jim Crow laws/Segregation period in America. To argue for this kind of discrimination is quite telling.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: andrewh7

originally posted by: yeahsurexxx
a reply to: SaturnFX

Then you take your money and go to the next place. Problem?


With that attitude we'd still have whites only restaurants, bathrooms, and drinking fountains. You must have absolutely no education in even recent US history to make such an absurd statement.

You are aware that segregation was INSTITUTIONALIZED back then , right?

You do know what that means, right?

In case you didn't, it means that segregation was IMPOSED BY [STATE] LAWS.

Without such laws, segregation would have ended long before it did.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Sorry, just because you cite some brain-dead government moron's attempt at changing the meanings of words and the fact that they got their idiocy passed into law doesn't change reality.

Of course, I acknowledge that this has been done.

I was speaking more in terms of plain old right and wrong.



originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: tanstaafl

Wrong.

More specifically, the definition of a "public accommodation" can be broken down into two types of businesses/facilities:
- Government-owned/operated facilities, services, and buildings
- Privately-owned/operated businesses, services, and buildings

Government-owned/operated facilities and services. Government-owned facilities include courthouses, jails, hospitals, parks, and other places owned and operated by federal, state and local government. Government-operated services, programs, or activities provided by federal, state, or local governments include transportation systems and government benefits programs (such as welfare assistance).

Privately-owned/operated businesses and buildings. Privately-owned businesses and facilities that offer certain goods or services to the public -- including food, lodging, gasoline, and entertainment -- are considered public accommodations for purposes of federal and state anti-discrimination laws. For purposes of disability discrimination, the definition of a "public accommodation" is even more broad, encompassing most businesses that are open to the public (regardless of type).

Discrimination in Public Accommodations

This was one of the basic parts of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which ended the Jim Crow laws/Segregation period in America. To argue for this kind of discrimination is quite telling.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   

nice 50s attitude.

we dont serve trans people = we dont serve gay people, or we dont serve men/women. we dont serve blacks.

Back then this wasn't a choice - segregation was IMPOSED BY STATE LAW.

You're conflating the two.

In reality, segregation would not last, because businesses that engaged in it simply would not thrive, and or would go out of business almost immediately.



posted on May, 4 2017 @ 03:13 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Apparently "plain old right & wrong" doesn't exist in this country, because it took that law to force American businesses to stop discriminating based on race. Did you know that the State of Mississippi even banned the kids show "Sesame Street" because it had a racially diverse cast? And that was in 1970, 6 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed. So clearly they didn't share in your sense of "plain old right & wrong" then, either.
edit on 4-5-2017 by enlightenedservant because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 5 2017 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

How does a rule prevent a rule breaker from breaking the rules? I KNOW you are one of the ones who point out the silliness of "gun free" zones. I hope you know you are pitching the same argument to me since a women's restroom is TECHNICALLY a "man free" zone and a male restroom is technically a "woman free" zone. So my point here is that nothing stops these people from entering the bathrooms now and equating transgenders to perverts is very insulting to the transgenders who just want to potty in peace.

Well...I hate to be that old guy but I follow the rules made by the owner of the place where I happen to be. If they post a sign saying "Don't pee in my pool", I actually won't do that (not that I usually do). If I go into a restaurant and a sign says "No shoes, No shirt, No service" I follow that rule or leave. So yes...for any respectable, lawful and law abiding individual, such signs placed by the owner should always be obeyed. You don't have to like it...but you also don't have to be there.

So if the signs say "Men" and "Women", they are segregated to their own bathrooms based upon their biology. That is the owner's intent...they are the OWNER and they get to impose their rules or you can leave. If you choose to argue that, you are just trying to "make trouble" and challenge the wishes of the person that owns the establishment. If you don't like their rules...stay away or leave. Same as if you don't like the amount of pepper they put on their food or the choice of drinks they offer.

On the other hand...if they choose to offer one bathroom with an "Everyone" sign on the door...we need to respect that also with the option to leave.



posted on May, 6 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

I was shaken to my core on 911. The myth of being safe because we're "over here" went up in smoke, literally, on that day. But thanks for your concern.
It doesn't explain why you think that hate only comes from the left.
It seems a bigoted thing to say. And really unwarranted.



posted on May, 12 2017 @ 08:22 AM
link   
All I will say is that religious minsters have to be able to refuse to marry anybody they don't feel comfortable marrying, there is the justice of the peace as a secondary fall back for anybody else. I know some that would resign their position before they would marry gays.
It would be a huge violation of there conscious and their personal rights.
Respect and personal rights are two way street in 2017.
edit on 12-5-2017 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join