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.

 

Are tattoos the next target for SJW?

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcalibur254

You need the blues brothers to sort out your nazi problem.
Amazes me how anyone can stick up for nazi bastards.




posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I would be irate if I was told to leave the pool because the guests didnt like something about me either. Regardless of if it is something I like or dislike...its not ok to kick someone out over tattoos or maybe how they dress or maybe cause they smoke or whatever...see what I'm getting at here. I'm not saying after he became irate he wasn't a problem and didn't need to leave. I'm saying he should have never been approached over it in the first place or at least not hassled over it. He had every right to be there and show the world how disgusting of a person he is.


Yes he had the right, in an absolutist sense. In an absolutist world, yes, those people who complained should have been able to just look at him with pity in their hearts and be saddened over the patheticness of a lost soul. However we do not live in that kind of world. People are frail and rather than respond with accepting stupididty, quite often end up displaying their own.

In this day of full body tattooing, this fellow chose to wear tattoos designed to entice overblown reaction. He got what he was after, rejection from people around him. He brought this on himself, and now he has his reward. He is a martyr for the Nazi cause. Hip hip hooray.


What an ignorant viewpoint.

Did you ever think he LIKES his tatoos?

He probably couldn't give a cap what you think k with your woe is him sensibilities.

So pathetic...



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Also I could care less that he had to leave after getting belligerent...that's how that works. What I do care about is how,the staff at a public pool is overstepping their rights. They have no right to ask him to cover,them or to ask him to leave which is I bet exactly what happened...logically I can't think of anything else the lifeguard would have been saying to him.

Says who? Who says they aren't allowed to talk to him about his clothing? I'm sure they can come talk to him if he was running around butt naked. You are just making regulations up in your head so you can keep blaming liberals. Your partisan intentions are clear as you don't really have an argument.


No, genius, they DON'T have a right to ask him to cover up. That's called discrimination.

Have all of you gone stupid?



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: abago71

What is next is anything that will get someone like yourself mad and angry. The news is entertainment. It's about ratings in order to make money. If they run a story on SJW wanting to censor tatoos what makes you think this is more real than any other story designed to motivate you to watch? What makes you think people on the left want to get rid of tatoos? Don't you think there are quite of few people in left-wing ranks sporting art-work? What could you possibly be thinking to conclude the left is out to get you????



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Nope they would not be, as its a public pool. If they want that type of control then you pay for a membership at a pool that will protect your children's eyes from things you dislike.


I agree with your point to a degree. Certainly were this a private pool I think more us us might agree. However it is a public pool But here, is there not the right of the people to declare what is acceptable behavior in their own ''commons'? My stance is yes.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Xcalibur254

You need the blues brothers to sort out your nazi problem.
Amazes me how anyone can stick up for nazi bastards.

One German to another, circa 1933:
"I don't know why you stick up for those Jews."

We live in America.
Supporting another's rights is not defending his position or his philosophy.... It is a matter of rights, whether or not you agree with them.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:14 PM
link   
a reply to: abago71




The statement continued, “We want to reassure our guests that while the agency does not deny access to programs or facilities based on personal appearance, we do require that all guests and employees treat one another with respect.”


That answers your own question.




posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Let's reverse this situation, purely as a hypothetical, shall we?

This gentleman doesn't have a tattoo that depicts Nazism, or associated evilness, it is, instead, a Star of David--which some, thankfully few, find offensive, as well...and that someone complained. The offensive tattoo wearing individual was escorted out by police...

What conversation would we be having now?

What ever happened to being judged by ones actions, rather than appearance?

I find the Nazi ideology loathsome in the extreme, it's indefensible. In this instance, the person in question was, by the account, not preaching the gospel of the Hitlerite. He was charging his electronics? I think maybe, just maybe, he could have got a pass.

Actions. Not appearance. Obviously, the day Martin Luther King, Jr spoke of hasn't quite arrived yet, has it?

Yes, yes, he's wearing a tattoo--he must therefore have committed evil acts. Maybe he has, maybe he will. I don't know. I can only judge him on this one moment in time. By the account, he wasn't doing anything wrong...what ill had the man done at that moment--which is all the lifeguard had to go by. Yet "tattoo guy" is the one in the wrong...

Guilty because tattoo. Not actions, tattoo.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Very well put.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Pretty sure you'd need to have some,votes,and possibly a constitutional amendment to allow the people to decide what's ok for the common areas. As it stands, if he isn't bothering anyone or broken the law, he has the right to assume whatever appearance he wishes. That's why muslims can wear burkas even though a lot of people don't like the practice. Also why fat people can wear ill fitting clothing, and prostitutes can wear almost nothing. Its why we can pick our noses where ever we like and a whole lot of other things many people may not like or be offended by. Hell you could never shower again and visit public places every day for the rest of your life...its your right to do so.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: testingtesting

So which other groups rights are you going to trample all over...'cause you don't like 'em?

The Nazi ideology is loathsome, as I've said in many places prior to this, it's indefensible.

Shouldn't he be judged on his actions, rather than his ink?

I don't like any tattoos, period. Does that give me the right to have people sporting them kicked out of public areas?



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

originally posted by: Justso
a reply to: Krazysh0t

He became belligerent after the lifeguard became aggressive with him. Did you read the op?


The guard became aggressive? How did he do that, by just talking to the guy? Is the guy a nazi or a snowflake.

Get in my face and I might call that aggressive.
Raise your voice to me for no reason and I might call it aggressive.


Do it to a cop.

They call it being aggressive.

Agreed. I took it to heart years ago. With cops it is ''yes sir'' and ''no sir'' and ''whatever you say sir''.
But still I think that in this case those tattoos are designed to evoke reactionary impulses in people. Those tattoos are belligerent in and of themselves. He got what he wanted, knee jerk reaction from those around him. And when they reacted like was his intent, by having them put on his body, he then got to play the role he desired. Snowflake martyr. Like the old Monty Python, '' come and see, look look I'm being repressed. Look at the repression inherent in the systerm. "

edit on 31America/ChicagoTue, 15 Aug 2017 12:21:28 -0500Tue, 15 Aug 2017 12:21:28 -050017082017-08-15T12:21:28-05:001200000021 by TerryMcGuire because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I would be irate if I was told to leave the pool because the guests didnt like something about me either. Regardless of if it is something I like or dislike...its not ok to kick someone out over tattoos or maybe how they dress or maybe cause they smoke or whatever...see what I'm getting at here. I'm not saying after he became irate he wasn't a problem and didn't need to leave. I'm saying he should have never been approached over it in the first place or at least not hassled over it. He had every right to be there and show the world how disgusting of a person he is.


Yes he had the right, in an absolutist sense. In an absolutist world, yes, those people who complained should have been able to just look at him with pity in their hearts and be saddened over the patheticness of a lost soul. However we do not live in that kind of world. People are frail and rather than respond with accepting stupididty, quite often end up displaying their own.

In this day of full body tattooing, this fellow chose to wear tattoos designed to entice overblown reaction. He got what he was after, rejection from people around him. He brought this on himself, and now he has his reward. He is a martyr for the Nazi cause. Hip hip hooray.


What an ignorant viewpoint.

Did you ever think he LIKES his tatoos?

He probably couldn't give a cap what you think k with your woe is him sensibilities.

So pathetic...
So you call me ignorant and pathetic.

And all you have to offer is maybe he likes his tattoos. Well yes, sure, maybe he does. It's settled.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Very well said .See my previous post if you would wondering about your opinion in that matter.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

So getting iconography related to a hate-filled ideology permanently applied to your skin is not an action? Either way it's a moot point. He was kicked out for belligerent behavior.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Well...who's to say, and I have no reason to believe this but it is very possible, he didn't go to prison and have to pick a side...I have known a few people who found themselves in that situation. It made life safer and easier for them while locked up. Once out they were very different people than before and basically had to learn to drop the act from prison which didn't happen over night. A lot of assumptions are being made here, even from myself, which isn't the best way to approach this. I can say that his right to be there is not an assumption and no one had a right to ask him to cover anything up or to leave until he got belligerent.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: seagull

I'll be honest, if this guy came up and complained about a guy with a Star of David tattoo I'd probably tell him to get lost. But then again Judaism is not a hate-filled ideology that led to the deaths of millions of innocent Nazis. If you want to claim that makes me a bigot so be it. At least I'm bigoted against Nazis.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: lordcomac

My plan is the Island Nation of Tabago

If I'm emigrating anywhere it's gonna be due to fresh lobster and sunny skies



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: RickyD

Correct,30 days in jail is most different than 15 years in prison doing hard time. At that point the mind to survive would lead you to get a tatoo to stay alive.



posted on Aug, 15 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Gargamel

Wow! Four pages and we have someone equating this Nazi with the Jews in Nazi Germany. What has happened to this country?


It was meant to illustrate every oppressive faction that tries to censor what they deem offensive. Like I said it is a slippery slope that at some point will find something you say, do or think as being worthy of the same treatment.




top topics



 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join