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.

 

T-shirt gets Van Nuys woman kicked out of federal building

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ATruGod
 


I don't believe it did. That wasn't my point anyway, my point was what might have been on his mind at the time.




posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:27 PM
link   
TruGod, it didn't. I just meant that he's probably seen alot of people wearing alot of stupid crap and that in all the times I been in court, and seen people going before the judge no less, the crap they wear. She might have been to pick there someone up or something, I don't know.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:28 PM
link   
Woops, I didn't think my first response to TruGod went, so I made another. Oh well, sorry kids.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacebot
Some other poster said that it was offending to him/her that couples (man and women) are seeing kissing in the mouth or holding hands, and that was perceived or "assumed" that it was a threat to him/her and a way of shoving their way of life to him/her. [edit on 28-8-2008 by spacebot]


I actually believe that was a question to mythatsabigprobe and not a statement of belief. mmm..I don't believe "threat to any specific person" was ever mentioned. Jump to erroneous conclusions much?

The question was:

Are you also offended by heterosexuals showing their sexual preferences in public? As heterosexuals every second of every day go around promoting their sexual orientation preferences in public. They do so by holding hands, kissing, dancing etc.

Which the question was never answered, and was completely ignored. Therefore ignoring the point I was making, that mythatsabigprobe was actually stating that he/she was offended by those promoting a sexual preference that was not the same as his/hers. Therefore that being a bigoted thinking pattern.

So, how did you come up with the theory that if a question is asked then that person must be threatened by what they are asking about?

Hmm, if I follow that pattern of thinking then your question of "Do you understand that sexually deprived people might often resort to "unusual" tactics in order to "get some"?" I must therefore jump to the conclusion that you are sexually deprived and that you are resorting to "unusual" tactics in order to "get some" and somehow you feel threatened by others who don't feel the same way.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by spacebot
 


Actually its the generalizations that make your responses seem ignorant.
ie



I tend to look the other way when I see types like "hey give me attention"




and anything else going on in her "weird" mind was a bit of a watered down version too




Ok I can accept that, she was a "watered down" weirdo. Maybe her medication has started kicking in.


Generalize much?

She probably actually had business at that Federal building and wasnt there for attention... which is probably why the other guards took her to the front of the line.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Well, some people would be happy that a chance would be given to them to actually state that looking at couples kissing in the mouth and holding hands scares them.
Why should I be a homophobic person or anyone else who disagrees with your lesbian friend for that matter?
Homophobic means "in fear of homosexuals". Last time I checked they had nothing I would feel threatened about, except, if they were holding a crowbar in their hands and were meeting me behind a dark corner, or they were threatening they would fire me If i refused to "discover" their "open mindedness". LOL!


The only thing a man might get afraid of, is another man that can stand in as a better quality in the eyes of a woman he adores or at least wants her to be his mate.
In other words another man that might be "more of a man" (according to a woman's tastes)

I do believe that my human coding is "intact". Therefore I am not afraid of any homosexuals since they don't have what it takes to steal my woman/en from me.

The term "homophobic" might be entirely fabricated to serve an agenda.
I am not happy seeing people gullible enough to swallow anything they throw their way just because they believe it servers their purpose.
Deny ignorance, ok?

[edit on 28-8-2008 by spacebot]



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacebot
signature
Help us find this video:
Salyut 6 UFO Sighting
"When you try to create new knowledge, the only tool we have as humans is our imagination. The creation of new rational paradigms is itself an irrational process"
S. J. Gates Viewpoints on String Theory


Fantastic, another "UFO Weirdo". I must keep you away from my "kids" lest they be "infected" by your mental deficiencies, just like all the other "weirdo" crackpots who are weird. I know all the smart people will "understand" that all you are looking for "is" attention, and completely disregard "anything" you say.


Classy spacebot, classy.

Warning: Post contains sarcasm.

[edit on 28-8-2008 by round_eyed_dog]



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:26 PM
link   
I must have touched a string somewhere, but never mind.
You can call me whatever you like, Dr Who, you see I am not a UFO weirdo. I can't feel threatened by this, indeed you will realize this if you follow my posts. Nice avatar btw, do you appear as a Sci Fi admirer on purpose, like admiring stories about fictitious aliens yourself or you just grabbed the first picture you found available that you believe it conveys any hidden phallic meanings? :p

Anyway to anyone that may be interested here is my take on things regarding "homophobia":

Another reason, the primary reason that men might actually appear as "homophobic" or according to my opinion, appear threatened against people that "advertise" their non heterosexual sexual preferences, is because:

Naturally like any animal species equipped for survival, in similar way humans and particularly men, are often careful of the picture they have to project to their surrounding community. Simply, a man has to appear with certain qualities to his surroundings, like the leader of the pack to attract as much women attention as he can, like the strongest of most, like the most intelligent etc etc you get the idea.

Being very fond or seen as socializing with other particular groups of people that do not comply in the same manner of behavior that the general idea of procreation requires from the opposite sex, it is natural that this man if he has to develop any fears he will mostly develop fears not about any inner doubts that he may be facing just in case he could actually be a homosexual too, (like the modern fairy tale tells us) but because he's socializing with a homosexual group and this behavior might make him appear like less of a man in the eyes of a woman.
Hes natural coding kicks in and he behaves like he believes he has to behave to remain relatively attractive to the female. It's natural probably and I am sad to say that I don't believe that human society will become more "civilized" to homosexuals any time soon, unless someone will have to delete men natural coding responsible for human procreation/evolution. You know the survival of the human race etc.

This is what is probably going on, not any other fairy tales any "weirdos" have been spreading around for ages.

So, it probably has nothing to do with you "guys". Its all for the women believe it or not.

[edited for typos]

[edit on 28-8-2008 by spacebot]



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by ATruGod
 




Can you show me exactly where it says security guards are allowed to interpret the laws/rules (or lack there of) to thier own ends?


I quoted this earlier from Wiki...


Security personnel in the U.S. derive their powers not from the state, as public police officers do, but from a contractual arrangement that give them 'Agent of the Owner' powers. This includes a nearly unlimited power to question with the absence of probable cause requirements that frequently dog public law enforcement officers...


...as an example. Obviously there is even more to it than that, but I am not about to rehash all of the material I was taught in school and in the field.



Your kidding right? Others Guards, the people at the fed building, and his company said it was out of line even the DOJ said it was out of line.


And I agree with them. But "out of line" does not mean that the guard did anything illegal though, and you will see that nothing of substance will be done about it. You will see things like this and worse continue to happen more and more. To be honest, I'm surprised that the guard was "sold out" in order to placate the public. That doesn't usually happen.



That is simply abuse of power.


It is, and it happens all the time.

[edit on 8/28/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by spacebot
 


Whooooosh!

That's the sound of the previous post going over your head spacebot.

Nice slam insinuating the op was gay as well.

Do you know how to use quotes correctly, or are you impersonating Chris Farley?



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


Wow. I can see where you are coming from...

Sorry, not a one-liner anymore.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by loam
 



Your legal authority ends when it is exercised for reasons that violate the law.


You're gonna have a tough time proving my reasoning as a guard.



You couldn't possibly believe otherwise, could you? Because if you do (and you're actually in the profession), THAT is chilling in and of itself alone.


Be afraid. Be very afraid.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by amazed
 


Hahahahah, specially the last paragraph I enjoyed!

Some people still can not wrap their heads around diversity. I like it very much when the gay bashers say that gay couples will raise gay kids and then totally forget that a gay person's biological parents are straight (unless ofcourse all gay people have closet gay parents which MUST be the case otherwise the homophobic have a nasty problem explaining that 'wicked way of life", as if being straight is a way of life).



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacebot
I must have touched a string somewhere, but never mind.
You can call me whatever you like, Dr Who, you see I am not a UFO weirdo. I can't feel threatened by this, indeed you will realize this if you follow my posts. Nice avatar btw, do you appear as a Sci Fi admirer on purpose, like admiring stories about fictitious aliens yourself or you just grabbed the first picture you found available that you believe it conveys any hidden phallic meanings? :p

Anyway to anyone that may be interested here is my take on things regarding "homophobia":

Another reason, the primary reason that men might actually appear as "homophobic" or according to my opinion, appear threatened against people that "advertise" their non heterosexual sexual preferences, is because:

Naturally like any animal species equipped for survival, in similar way humans and particularly men, are often careful of the picture they have to project to their surrounding community. Simply, a man has to appear with certain qualities to his surroundings, like the leader of the pack to attract as much women attention as he can, like the strongest of most, like the most intelligent etc etc you get the idea.

Being very fond or seen as socializing with other particular groups of people that do not comply in the same manner of behavior that the general idea of procreation requires from the opposite sex, it is natural that this man if he has to develop any fears he will mostly develop fears not about any inner doubts that he may be facing just in case he could actually be a homosexual too, (like the modern fairy tale tells us) but because he's socializing with a homosexual group and this behavior might make him appear like less of a man in the eyes of a woman.
Hes natural coding kicks in and he behaves like he believes he has to behave to remain relatively attractive to the female. It's natural probably and I am sad to say that I don't believe that human society will become more "civilized" to homosexuals any time soon, unless someone will have to delete men natural coding responsible for human procreation/evolution. You know the survival of the human race etc.

This is what is probably going on, not any other fairy tales any "weirdos" have been spreading around for ages.

So, it probably has nothing to do with you "guys". Its all for the women believe it or not.

[edited for typos]

[edit on 28-8-2008 by spacebot]


Wow, who actually touched the "string" there friend? You didn't even catch the sarcasm warning....amazing.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
reply to post by loam
 


That's true, I do now agree that the guard was wrong to throw her out of the building.

However, I still feel the same about being subjected to material advertising sexual orientations in public.



Well gosh, what about weddings? Men and women get married all the time, I see shops who advertise wedding dresses etc, businesses promoting wedding items such as invitations, wedding rings and a multitude of other related items. They advertise heterosexual couples in windows in wedding outfits or in magazines. People even put advertisements of their weddings in the newspapers. Is this not a form of "promoting sexual preference in public"?

Are you offended by this? Or only when they are promoting same sex marriages?

What about all the television shows where the main characters are a married heterosexual couple. This is promoting a sexual orientation in public in a big way.

Oh and let us not forget "pregnant women", especially those that wear shirts that have sayings on them such as "its a boy/girl", "Bold. Sassy. Preggo", "contents under pressure", "Bun in the oven" and a myriad of other sayings, they are promoting their sexual preference in public in a fashion, are you offended by this? Though we do have to remember that not ALL pregnant women are heterosexual, so assumptions are made here as well.

Should we lock up all pregnant women so they are not advertising their sexual preference in front of you and your children? Cause you know, your kids might start thinking, and asking questions. Actually depending on the age of your children seeing a pregnant woman is likely to cause more of a stir than seeing lesbian.com on a t-shirt.

I hope I have finally made my point, which is in my opinion you and many others like the security guard are only offended when people advertise their sexual orientations that are not the "norm, christian view, or your own" of heterosexual.

It is called bigotry, and bigotry rears its ugly head in many many forms, it can be in sexuality, religious, racial, even in regards to a persons weight or height or style of clothing they like to wear and even hair color. Bigotry really irks me, especially when I recognize it in myself, and when I do recognize it in myself I try to admit it, find out why, where it comes from and work towards removing that bigotry from my thinking.

This is how we deny ignorance, by a willingness to recognize that ignorance in ourselves, and work towards understanding why/where/how/when and is it truly a trait within ourselves that we wish to promote in the next generation.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by teeveesfrank
 


I am not insinuating anything. Whats your take on my opinion about "homophobia"?
I do believe it opens the door for interesting conspiracy theories about population control either physically or mentally. In our case mentally. The rest you ask me I don't understand.
Also:

I am overwhelmed by the open-minded-ness of the so called open minded people that is at display here.

Dr Who, listen I post to communicate ideas and ideas to be communicated back to me, it seems, some "open minds" are not really open after all. I see that homosexuals in general are or are being made to believe in a dogma they can't move off very far from it else their whole "view of the world" will have to collapse. Post by post and as we drill down in this discussion, it appears that both arguments by either side are becoming more and more "uncivilized". In reality we are kidding but only ourselves. Any "homosexual" style of life or belief, will have to stand the test of time. IMO it is only a trend, a temporary trend. Of course homosexuality is nothing temporary, but the "look me I'm cool and civilized since I'm a homosexual" trend is starting to wear off a bit.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacebot
reply to post by teeveesfrank
 


I am not insinuating anything. Whats your take on my opinion about "homophobia"?
I do believe it opens the door for interesting conspiracy theories about population control either physically or mentally. In our case mentally. The rest you ask me I don't understand.
Also:

I am overwhelmed by the open-minded-ness of the so called open minded people that is at display here.

Dr Who, listen I post to communicate ideas and ideas to be communicated back to me, it seems, some "open minds" are not really open after all. I see that homosexuals in general are or are being made to believe in a dogma they can't move off very far from it else their whole "view of the world" will have to collapse. Post by post and as we drill down in this discussion, it appears that both arguments by either side are becoming more and more "uncivilized". In reality we are kidding but only ourselves. Any "homosexual" style of life or belief, will have to stand the test of time. IMO it is only a trend, a temporary trend. Of course homosexuality is nothing temporary, but the "look me I'm cool and civilized since I'm a homosexual" trend is starting to wear off a bit.


I'm fine with whatever theories you have, and even though they aren't really relevant to the topic of the post you are more than welcome to them.

I do however take issue with you making broad generalizations and calling people names.

In my second post, I tried to facetiously point out that you were being childish by seizing on a generality in your signature. I was mocking you in the vague hope that you might have an Ebeneezer Scrooge like awakening and maybe tone it down a bit.

Alas, you seem to have missed the point entirely and here I am in another post trying to get through to you.


Ps. I am a Dalek!! Not the Doc-tor!! Exterminate! Exterminate! EXTERMINATE!!!

Pps...Hello Tom Servo.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by round_eyed_dog
 


Just the other day my 8 year daughter asked "what does erectile disfuction mean?" after watching a slew of Cialis commercials. I told her it's a medicine for old men who can't move their third leg


But seriously, I think all forms of sexual misdirections should be laid out for all to see, so you know what side of the fence you are dealing with. It's the clueless and sheltered who always get turned out sexually by their own lack of sexual education.

Besides, there are several shows with lesbians pawing over each others crotches... Hey, yeast on yeast can be a beast



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


I notice how you highlighted the "Unlimited power" but left out the rest of the sentence that says "to question with the absence of probable cause requirements".

You obviously interpret the law as bad as some of these religions interpret the bible.



It is, and it happens all the time.


Yes and it needs to be stopped maybe if this lout of a guard gets fired he can be the first of many examples.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by round_eyed_dog
 


I am sorry I missed your point but maybe I wouldn't do this if it wasn't out of point with this thread, anyway it is not my fault the signature space we are allowed is too small for anything meaningful to be explained especially if it encompasses much broader concepts. Also I never called out anyone personally in this thread, you seem you did though. Still no essence of the original topic has been shared. Speaking about generalizations this thread is full of it (no pun). (Oh ok, there was pun) For one, all heterosexuals are supposedly "this" or "that" against homosexuals, while some of the homosexuals can't "get it". We (heterosexuals) are not responsible for the things you are pointing out to us, and we should feel "ashamed" about, it is the way we are created either someone can accept this or not. Prime law of humans, was, is and will be survival and procreation. You can't question us in such matters. Any serious attempts to establish a "rethinking" of our social behavior in such matters is not only bordering on the ridiculous, it is ridiculous. I consider "woowoo" threads much more healthy. They at least have a meaning in some sense.

I do not hate 'diversity". I do not believe that homosexuality is diversity though. Diversity in the means of ways of sexual behavior would mean simply a different way of procreation because, that's the reason that sexuality exists for, procreation. This is clearly not the case with homosexuality, there is no procreation involved. I do not hate gays or lesbians either, I can respect them, but I cant respect weirdos.

[edit on 28-8-2008 by spacebot]
[more content]

I am also outraged by the irresponsible behaviors of people discussed in this thread. Showing your sexual preferences and possibly traumatising younger individuals by shoving them your way of viewing things, while these things do not support in any way our natural ways of survival. Proving nothing in reality, just a desperate attempt to widen your pool of sexual selection, limited by your own sexual behavior. I find such actions absurd and totally irresponsible. All this BS is just because some people cant find enough sexual partners so they resort in luring unprotected individuals to "their world".
There is no chance in Hell that anyone like some of these more "vocal" individuals of the homosexual community would make a responsible parent someday in the future. Sorry for me wanting to protect my future my kids sir.

[edit on 28-8-2008 by spacebot]



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join