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.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: jimmyx
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: jimmyx
I'm sorry but did the baker refuse ALL service to the customer? That's what happened here, far worse. Why are you people who railed against the baker not railing against this restaurant .. oh that's right, hypocrisy at it's finest.
all service??....yeah, they wanted the baker to bake them a wedding cake.....that was the "service"
And they said that violates our religious beliefs, but we are happy to serve you anything that doesn't. So tell me, did Sanders ask for anything and get told no but you can have anything on the menu?
It is different. It would only be the same if Sanders was asking the Red He to cater a Trump rally, or if the gay gentleman just came into the bakery for a bite to eat.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: jimmyx
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: jimmyx
I'm sorry but did the baker refuse ALL service to the customer? That's what happened here, far worse. Why are you people who railed against the baker not railing against this restaurant .. oh that's right, hypocrisy at it's finest.
all service??....yeah, they wanted the baker to bake them a wedding cake.....that was the "service"
And they said that violates our religious beliefs, but we are happy to serve you anything that doesn't. So tell me, did Sanders ask for anything and get told no but you can have anything on the menu?
It is different. It would only be the same if Sanders was asking the Red He to cater a Trump rally, or if the gay gentleman just came into the bakery for a bite to eat.
Exactly the point I have been making that none of them want to acknowledge.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: jimmyx
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: jimmyx
I'm sorry but did the baker refuse ALL service to the customer? That's what happened here, far worse. Why are you people who railed against the baker not railing against this restaurant .. oh that's right, hypocrisy at it's finest.
all service??....yeah, they wanted the baker to bake them a wedding cake.....that was the "service"
And they said that violates our religious beliefs, but we are happy to serve you anything that doesn't. So tell me, did Sanders ask for anything and get told no but you can have anything on the menu?
It is different. It would only be the same if Sanders was asking the Red He to cater a Trump rally, or if the gay gentleman just came into the bakery for a bite to eat.
Exactly the point I have been making that none of them want to acknowledge.
I’ve pointed out the difference numerous times to no avail.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
This discussion is not about the baker and the gay wedding cake except to the extent that what was wrong in one case is the same thing that is wrong in this one. The restauranteurs have just as much "religious belief" basis to refuse service because lying is one of the sins that God hates, breaks the Ten Commandments, etc. etc.
The issue is refusing service to a member of the public that is not a) disrupting your business or b) endangering the public health. WHY someone does that or thinks it's justified is the problem as I said.
Now, you can keep trying to pick a fight, and someone else may take you up on it, but I won't be helping you. Best.
originally posted by: kerrichin
i dont see this any different to the guy who refused to make a cake a for a gay couple.
they dont agree with her they dont serve her
only difference its a republican being victimised instead of a minority
originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
It seems to me you're pointing to the form of the justification for wrong action ... rather than the wrong action.
Yes, the specifics of the two situations are different. When I am saying that the two issues are the same issue, that's not a claim that the justification for discrimination was exactly the same in both cases (which is what you seem to be taking issue with.)
I am saying that unfair discrimination in the public square is wrong; in effects the two situations are identical.
originally posted by: lakenheath24
I could have listed a lot more but really i think 2 sufficed to prove a a point....no? Wellsney college, Southern university, the naacp. These discriminate.
But to your point, the list of what is discriminating grows with each sunrise. I can see your point and agree to some extent but jeezus where does it stop. You going to let bloods and crips in alongside hells angels into a 5 star restaurant cuz you might violate their rights? Thats absurd of course but perhaps you see my point.
9a reply to: Gryphon66
originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: JBurns
You are itching to go at your fellow American aren't you?.
You need to all forget left and right and understand you are falling for purposeful division.
My bet you would be egging other folk on to do stuff like purging while hiding in your basement....oh wait that's you already.