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 p51mustang
no mosqueteers? it isnt a small world after all?
say what about this Alladin character- i dont
want my kids exposed to islamic devil worship!
[edit on 20-8-2010 by p51mustang]
Thus it seems she's doing it for the greater good of changing the rules of Western society
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
Actually I replied to him and he has run off deciding to ignore me instead.
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
So, I'll also ask you to show me where being a racist is illegal
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
I'll also ask you to show me...where the Bill of Rights grants you the right to enjoy Disney Land.
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
The fact of the matter is: he is wrong at best and a liar at worst.
Originally posted by ollncasino
I was busy arguing with Muslim apologists on another thread. So many tree huggers, so little time.
Racism is illegal in the USA when racist hate speech incites illegal violence and the threat of violence is imminent. See Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969).
The 14th amendment of the Bill of Rights (due process clause) has been interpreted since 1897 as providing substantive protection to private contracts and thus prohibiting a variety of social and economic regulation, under what was referred to as "freedom of contract".
Freedom of contract is the freedom of individuals and corporations to form contracts without government restrictions. See Allgeyer v. Louisiana (1897)
It looks as if it is in fact you who is wrong. Does that mean you are wrong at best and a liar at worst?
You tree huggers do love to throw out the slurs and insults.
The fact that you feel the need to do so, would suggest that you lack confidence in the strength of your argument.
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
So being a racist is not illegal.
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
But this does not give you a right to enjoy Disney Land. It gives you the right to enter into a contract with Disney Land with out government involvement, not to be fully satisfied and enjoying said contract.
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
While I do think you are a xenophobe, I do not think that immediately invalidates your argument. I think you being wrong invalidates your argument.
Originally posted by MR BOB
It really doesnt bother me if they want to wear one as long as it doent affect their ability to work.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by MR BOB
It really doesnt bother me if they want to wear one as long as it doent affect their ability to work.
But it does bother Walt Disney and Walt Disney's rights need to be respected also.
Little do these Muslims realize the magnitude of their actions in imitating Kufaar (see Hadith section). This is a truly shocking! Hopefully the information presented herein will enlighten those. And then there are others who claim that the matters concerning beards is a "little" issue not worthy of mention nor practice. To them I say get off the denial bandwagon, you're a Muslim! Follow the Prophet (Peace be upon him) in all aspects of life, for he was the best of examples. I couldn't tell you how many times I've mistaken a Muslim brother (outside of the Masjid) for a kaafir on account of his clean-shaven, well oiled, face. How can I say "Assalaamu Alaikum Brother!" when I do not know if he is a Muslim.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Racist speech is illegal in the USA when it incites illegal violence and the threat of violence is imminent. You didn't know that, did you?
"...I have the right to enjoy a traditional all American Walt Disney experience."
Anyway, now that we have established that private citizens and legal persons do indeed have contractual rights under the constitution, would you be good enough to answer the question I posed that you have so far have evaded?
Where in the Bill of Rights does it say a religious right supersedes a secular right?
I would appreciate an answer.
So far you have called me a racist, a xenophobe and at best mistaken and at worst a liar. In response I called you a tree hugger.
I will repeat it again: The fact that you feel the need to insult others would suggest that you lack confidence in the strength of your argument.
Still, in light of the quality of your legal knowledge, perhaps it would be best if you stuck with the insults.
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
Here is my answer:
Board of Education of Kiryas Joel Village School District v. Grumet
This ruling stated laws could not be passed in favor of 'irreligion'. They can not honor non-religion over religion or vice versa..
It was tested with Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal and upheld.
The laws must remain neutral and because of this the issue is not cut and dried.
Originally posted by AdAbsurdum
To clarify, lemme ask you this: What do you think, personally, about affirmative action?
Originally posted by ollncasino
Your above summary of the case supports my assertion that a religious rights don't supersede or over-ride secular rights.
The principle that religious rights don't have priority over non religious rights is clear.
Does the case lay down a principle that religious rights supersede non religious right?
No.
Perhaps you should read cases more carefully? Or even try reading the original cases rather than someone else's conclusion?
Sorry, what does that have to do with my right to enjoy a traditional Walt Disney experience or a religious employee demanding the right to wear religious clothing at work?
It looks suspiciously like an attempt to go horribly off topic and derail the debate.
Assume a Muslim takes employment as one of the Mickey Mouse characters and his beard sticks from below the mask (just bear with me for a second). Disney offers him an "off-stage" job. He sues. Is it cool?
Originally posted by operation mindcrime
reply to post by buddhasystem
Assume a Muslim takes employment as one of the Mickey Mouse characters and his beard sticks from below the mask (just bear with me for a second). Disney offers him an "off-stage" job. He sues. Is it cool?
Can I have a wack at it??
If he was specifically hired for this function and it is not described in his contract or company rules that a beard must not be visible from under his mask....yes, he can sue.
It is ridiculous but he could.