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.

 

Muslim School denied entry into Texas Private School Sports League (based on simple questionaire)

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by ImaMuslim
 


That is where you are wrong!
Yeshua/Jesus, was G-d in flesh,not a prophet!


And you can prove this...how, exactly?




posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I wonder what question did they ask Jewish schools before enetering ?

Oh shoot, i guess there was none because that would be anti semite

Sports and politics is like drinking and driving
edit on 23-3-2012 by Intrud3r because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by imherejusttoread
 


That's my point though. Go do it for yourself, you can't be among us because we are a private group... but there's an ambiguation fallacy at work with the word private. A rental property is private property, but the law says you cannot discriminate in housing by reason of race religion etc. You don't have to let a Muslim into your private home where you live, but if you open your home to the public for purchase, you can no longer discrimination.

Likewise, it's all well and good to open a private soccer league- a group of schools can get together and arrange a soccer tournament and that's theirs to do as they like with... but once they open it up for the public to apply for entry, "privacy" becomes a flimsy excuse. These people didn't want privacy- they wanted others to come join their soccer league and presumably pay a fee for it... until the Muslims showed up.

You have already flatly admitted that you could be thrown out of society and reduced to living outdoors as a hunter gatherer if enough people with money decided to exclude you. That's not an American right. That's not privacy. That's actively screening one particular group from going about their lives in the way that anybody else could.

Do you understand that you are at the beginnings of a democratic approach to genocide- that with no further steps, merely the popular adoption of the step this one organization has already taken- would be enough to deprive people of their rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness?



posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by petrus4
 


I'm sure that is your opinion as a LIbertarian...


But it's not yours as a cultural Marxist, who is presumably obsessed with the idea that every single human being on this planet, in some way or another, is a victim; am I right?

This isn't about what the current law of the land is or isn't; it's about your emotionally based opinion. Even if, hypothetically speaking, it was about the law of the land, I wouldn't be much of a Libertarian if I actually gave a crap about that, now would I?

If you want to know the difference between Libertarianism and politically correct cultural Marxism, I can sum it up for you fairly simply. We believe that an individual is personally responsible for the choices they make. That doesn't mean that they are necessarily responsible for what other people decide to do, no; but it does mean that they are responsible for how they choose to respond to it. That's the core definition of what the word responsible actually means, if you think about it.

We are also not single mindedly, relentlessly obsessed with victimhood; because we understand that the entire reason why the obsession with victimhood exists in the first place, is because fascist politicians want to be able to exploit it.

If you want to remain a perpetual child for the rest of your existence, that is entirely your perogative. But understand that not all of us do; and as a result, not all of us need a parental figure who we can run to, everytime someone else says bad words to us and makes us cry.



posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by chloe4412
 

call me cynical - but it looks to me like the " questionaire " was written to exclude an islamic school


it's a private sports league of christian schools. probably founded because they're not allowed to play with public schools. (people still think "separation of church and state" is in the constitution...dumbasses)

classifying christians as "infidels" on one hand, then wanting to play soccer on the other is ridiculous.



posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Got to be very careful when dealing with Muslims...extra precaution is advised.



posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


Parochial schools can compete with public schools. And we were so freaking tired of getting our butts kicked by Sacred Heart that I can't even tell you about it politely- but we let them onto the field and nobody got hurt.

Most parochial schools are fairly small and have to do a lot more work on player development to field a competitive team from among their generally smaller student bodies. The Christian Schools in my area that play amongst themselves are the ones that play 9 man football and have almost no depth at any position.



posted on Mar, 23 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond
but if you open your home to the public for purchase, you can no longer discrimination.


You're confusing voluntary transactions with homesteading.


would be enough to deprive people of their rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness?


Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are meaningless words when they are abstracted from [or interpreted without] property rights.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 03:29 AM
link   
You know, if it were left up to the kids.

The kids would play and have fun.

Most of the kids are in private school because their parents sent them there.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by LennyDaRetard


You obviously don't know the law. Private entities can discriminate, public ones cannot. You could open up a restaurant right now and hang a sign saying "WE DO NOT HIRE OR SERVE BLACKS OR JEWS" and there is nothing anyone could do about it... other than boycott and the gov. find you ineligible for federal tax credits, federally based loans/relief programs or grants (as you are not an EEO). No matter what Woolsowrth's might have been forced to do, the law has since been rectified.

uh WAT? dude you CAN'T do that, that was like 90% of the civil rights movement, there is no a single restaurant that can do that, what decade do you think this is? the 1950's? no, the 14th amendment prevents this!
now religious organizations, such as churches can do that, but generally speaking a church that discriminates against groups won't have them joining anyway,



No one can force a private club to accept any member... country clubs don't have to let in blacks anymore than the Masons have to let in women... but gov. jobs/public roll unions... they have to let in black women.

uh yes they can, clubs can be forced to allow members if they meet the criteria of every other member. clubs aren't allowed to discriminate based on race, no one forces clubs often enough to haven them do it though.
masons don't have to allow women because women have their own version of the masons, it is the same as the boy and girl scouts. also a club is a business, so it counts under the business related discriminatory laws.
the masons are not a business as far as i can tell.


No law can force a black, private home owner to make him/her let a white person into their home if they don't want... but white people can't be excluded from public lands/buildings.

there is a difference between someones home and a business, a club is a business, all businesses have laws they have to follow.
hence why churches don't have to follow discriminatory laws, because they aren't businesses.


EDIT:

And as a fine example considering the topic... Non Catholic kids can be excluded from catholic elem/HS (IF the schools receives no fed funds... and if it does get fed $$$, the catholic school is required to take in a certain number of non catholics, and is excused from any racial quotas... and yes, there are a lot of all white/hispanic [but no blacks] catholic schools).

Hebrew school is under no obligation to teach non Jew kids about the Torah or Yiddish... it's private religious instruction.

edit on 23-3-2012 by LennyDaRetard because: (no reason given)

if a school takes federal money or any organization that does no matter what it is, has to follow the laws of the government.
which means the non-discriminatory laws.
if a hebrew school takes federal money will have to teach non-jews, but honestly have you heard of any nonjews wanting to go to hebrew school? as for catholic schools? they are general education schools, not just a school on catholicism, hebrew school on the other hand is. why the heck would you go to a school that is solely for teaching you about a religion you don't follow? that is the only reason they have hebrew school, jewish kids go to public or private schools like everyone else.
in fact i think i've read of a few jewish kids that have gone to catholic schools before.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Carseller4
 


Go peddle your ignorance elsewhere.

I have never been more disgusted by certain elements on ATS, mainly those who defend racism.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 04:36 AM
link   
reply to post by imherejusttoread
 


You're making it sound as if the Muslims just showed up to the tournament unannounced with explosive vests and said make room for us or else.

We're talking about people answering an open invitatation for schools to join a tournament being singled out with a very insulting extra step designed to get rid of them without outright saying "you're not welcome". This has nothing to do with "homesteading" and property rights and I suspect you know it just as well as those who sent this ignorant and bigotted questionaire.

But I can see that you'll defend that ignorance to no end- it is regretable that you are more committed to your self-interested politcal views than basic human decency. Your punishment is to live in a world where you may one day be seriously wronged just for your identity. It'd be nicer if we could just play soccer together, but oh well... the next genocide in North America probably won't come too soon. Hell, it'll probably be your great grand children at the very earliest- still your blood, but nobody you've actually met or had feelings for, so maybe it's worth it. Not the kind of Karma I'd want though.
edit on Sat 24 Mar 2012 by The Vagabond because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


I can prove this by reading my King James Bible,the Jewish
New Testament and prayer!



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by petrus4
 


I can prove this by reading my King James Bible,the Jewish
New Testament and prayer!


I don't actually argue with that. I've had experience of the power of both scripture and prayer before. I was more taking issue with what I interpreted as fanaticism on your part; but perhaps I misinterpreted.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by chloe4412
 


I think its political b*llsh*t.
The basic tennet of Christiantiy is to ' love one another' as we have been loved by Christ.
Not to mention the direction to ' love thy neighbour as thy self"

So *any* body or institution claiming a Christian identity that doesnt foster these two principles as foundational moral and social atttibutes can hardly claim to be a "Christian" organisaton.

This is a purely political stunt..designed to divide and judge.

I agree a private group has every 'right' to choose their constituants, Im not agruing that..but this is lame...and so its the kids on both sides that will suffer from not intermixing and those kids that will grow up to take on the hate and paranoia of their parentals.

What a waste of a precious opportunity.

ro.



posted on Mar, 24 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
I live in Houston, and I can tell you that religious association means alot down here.
I am conflicted in this particur instance. While I certainly see the validity in the well founded argument of the Sports league, but then again it is only a sports league. It isnt a by name Christian league, which is why I am hesitant to back them. If it were, I am fairly certain the Muslim school would not have applied. Not out of spite, but simply because they wouldent belong.
This is Texas. There are more churchs here than Starbucks. Majority rules is not biased or racist, it just how it is.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 05:26 AM
link   
Let’s make this very clear: This is christian private school. They will continue to win this. Im sure wanting to be apart of this athletic association is for one intent, that being. To shut down the Christian and Jewish religious expressions at their games. The muslims will come in and claim discrimination.
edit on 30-3-2012 by pachuchai because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by facelift
 

True...true you give them an inch and later they will want a yard. Obviously they are not welcomed to participate.High time you guys are not that accomodating.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join