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.

 

Should venues deny services to people based on their race, sexual orientation, gender, etc.

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   
Most people do not like it when anyone tries to make us abide by their moral compass, but then a good chunk of those same people cheer when it happens to people they do not like. It's hypocritical.

Either everyone is equal, and all businesses must accept anyone's money and deal with anyone that can pay; or we are all allowed to abide by our own moral compasses and personal preferences. I prefer the latter personally.

I draw my personal line at racists, lawyers, bankers and politicians. I will never do business with any of those people, their money is no good in my book. Others are free to draw their own lines. That is my opinion.




posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


The person who has a right to stop someone else's arm is the person whose nose is in jeopardy. Forgive my brevity but nature dictates that the spirals become tighter (which is much politer than saying you are wearing me out, don't you think?)



posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
It would be a blessing to find out a business was run by bigots... That way, the individual could be sure to not give them any money.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:51 AM
link   

TKDRL
Most people do not like it when anyone tries to make us abide by their moral compass, but then a good chunk of those same people cheer when it happens to people they do not like. It's hypocritical.

Either everyone is equal, and all businesses must accept anyone's money and deal with anyone that can pay; or we are all allowed to abide by our own moral compasses and personal preferences. I prefer the latter personally.

I draw my personal line at racists, lawyers, bankers and politicians. I will never do business with any of those people, their money is no good in my book. Others are free to draw their own lines. That is my opinion.


Why do you need such an absolutist position though? Can you not see that Walmart is a different proposition to a family-run funeral service or a tennis coach or an aggregate transporter?

Shops exist in the public sphere. As such they have certain responsibilities to serve people without prejudice. So yes, I would think that a store should serve a neo-nazi, assuming they weren't acting in a racist or defamatory manner. In any case how would one know they were a neo-nazi anyway?

But that doesn't mean every business should have to provide their service to everybody. That's just absurd and impossible.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Not sure I am understanding here. You are saying someone that rents or owns a shop are more obligated to serve everyone, than someone like me who runs my business out of my home?

Some racists are pretty obvious about it, putting up flags or tattoos for example.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 06:25 AM
link   
TkDRL and others in this thread have done a good job of trying to explain why a business owner may choose to not provide a "service" for people or groups that he/she may find in conflict with their personal moral integrity. I agree that is their RIGHT.

There is a difference between a retail business that basically is a cash and carry operation where all that's involved is picking an item and paying for it at the register, which in most cases does not involve much personal interaction and knowledge of the customer.

In this case , this woman is being asked to "participate" in a very personal way with a "ritual" she objects to. Doing Wedding Flowers often times involves consultations, on sight planning and set-up at the church or venue where the couple is being married, but it also often involves being a sort of " emotional support person " and providing a genuine desire to help make their Wedding as perfect as possible. How can this woman really be expected to do this if she doesn't even approve of the marriage?

I said in an earlier post that I would have done their wedding, but I've changed my mind and not because they're gay, but because they are jerks! Leave this poor Lady alone and find another florist that will embrace your special day. LOL..how much do you wanna bet that these guys are a "pain in the azz" to work with !!!
edit on 9-11-2013 by MountainLaurel because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-11-2013 by MountainLaurel because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 



edit on 9-11-2013 by darepairman because: Wrong thread



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by darepairman
 


Wrong thread bro lol.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by darkbake
 



Denial of services.

Choice.


When someone is not allowed to deny their services to another person, what does that make them?




They become a slave.

Slaves are punished when they don't do what their masters tell them.

Masters used their power and the power of the law to punish disobedient slaves.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by dusty1
 


Yes, that was exactly the problem with slavery. They chose to come here, they chose what kind of work they would do, they set their own price for doing the work, and then they were miserable because they had to pick cotton for gay people too. No wonder we have overcome prejudice so completely, given our obviously firm grasp on what we did wrong.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by The Vagabond
 





Yes, that was exactly the problem with slavery. They chose to come here, they chose what kind of work they would do, they set their own price for doing the work, and then they were miserable because they had to pick cotton for gay people too. No wonder we have overcome prejudice so completely, given our obviously firm grasp on what we did wrong.




Being forced to work for someone, without having a choice, and being punished for refusing, is slavery.



Maybe the baker didn't choose to be a baker, maybe they were born that way.

A baker doesn't necessarily set their price for work, cost of ingredients and other overhead combined with what the market will bare, determines where prices are set.




For thousands of years men and women have been getting married.

Now all of a sudden, in a grand social experiment, women are marrying women, and men are marrying men, and anyone who feels uncomfortable about it, must be burned at the stake?



Ironically a couple years later, the woman who chose to marry another woman, can change her mind, get a divorce, and choose to marry a man.

Yep, that is totally analogous to the prejudice that blacks faced after slavery in the United States.



And you know that there is no prejudice in the gay community, just ask the Buffs, and the Bears.
edit on 9-11-2013 by dusty1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   
It's still absurd that people would defend intolerance, why would anyone want to live in that world where people are so divided by Sexuality, Race, Religion etc?



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 





It's still absurd that people would defend intolerance, why would anyone want to live in that world where people are so divided by Sexuality, Race, Religion etc?


So we should be intolerant of intolerance?

There is not intolerance in the gay community?



A "not so attractive person" approaches a "beautiful person" and wants to dance, should the "beautiful person" be required to dance?

Is that intolerance?

Should the "beautiful person" be hunted down and fired from their place of work for refusing the request?


If a straight male asks a lesbian female for a date, should she be obligated to date him?

Isn't she being intolerant of males?

Should she be punished for refusing?



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by dusty1
 


That doesn't have much to do with a business being allowed to discriminate.

freedom of choice and personal preference regardless if i or you agree is a personal freedom, but when you open a business that serves people and wont based on sex, religion, race, sexuality etc that is restricting someone else's choice



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   

dusty1
Being forced to work for someone, without having a choice, and being punished for refusing, is slavery.

Maybe the baker didn't choose to be a baker, maybe they were born that way.


So nobody has any control or personal responsibility over their career path, and that fact would make them slaves if they weren't able to only slave for people they don't hate? I don't want to argue with that, I just want to be sure that the crazy stuff I heard is actually the same crazy stuff you said.



For thousands of years men and women have been getting married. Now all of a sudden, in a grand social experiment,


I hate to tell you this, but homosexuals are not a recent development. Read up on Ancient Greece- you may find it either horrifying or weird and confusing in ways you'd rather not discuss.


Ironically a couple years later, the woman who chose to marry another woman, can change her mind, get a divorce, and choose to marry a man.

Yep, that is totally analogous to the prejudice that blacks faced after slavery in the United States.


Um...
You seem to be arguing that homosexuals are not equivalent to African slaves because they don't have to stay gay (but bakers have to stay bakers as an extrapolation of the now violated "born gay" argument). I'm not sure why you're trying to refute such a comparison though, because the comparison was not between gays and slaves but between florists and slaves, and you were the one who made that comparison.



And you know that there is no prejudice in the gay community

Yes, there is prejudice in the gay community. Does that make them appropriate targets for prejudice?
If so, there is also murder in the gay community- you could take them out and make your god very happy and the courts wouldn't be able to argue with your ironclad defense.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 





That doesn't have much to do with a business being allowed to discriminate.



Sure it does. You are just not being intellectually honest.

Business is based on relationships.

Relationships with customers as well as with suppliers.

We should all have the right to choose who we have relationships with.





but when you open a business that serves people and wont based on sex, religion, race, sexuality etc that is restricting someone else's choice


The customer can choose to give their business to another establishment.

Driving someone out of business because you don't like their beliefs, limits everyone's choice





Small business owners put up their money, take all the risks, work long hours, often without pay. They are constantly under assault from large corporations (who are given more favorable pricing by manufacturers) government regulations and lawsuits.

Often times employees make more money and have more freedom than the business owner.

All business owners are not rich and they are not government institutions.



Only a mean vindictive person would try and destroy a small business person and keep them from making a living.


I'll ask one more question, using a small business analogy.

Should a sex worker (a small business person) be allowed to withhold services from anyone they choose?

What if they are uncomfortable with certain people or requests?


Or should they just be told:


"Hey, hoe, get in the kitchen and bake me a cake!"



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by dusty1
 


You have your beliefs and that is fine, maybe you have never faced discrimination like i have and like many other have

if i said i didn't want to date a guy because i wasn't attracted to him that is nothing close to me saying i don't want to date a guy because he is this "race"

if i had a business and someone came in with a "God hates Gays" shirt i would still serve them because that is what i opened my business for to make money serving the public with my services not to use it as a place to discriminate and showcase my views on peoples sexuality



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by The Vagabond
 





So nobody has any control or personal responsibility over their career path, and that fact would make them slaves if they weren't able to only slave for people they don't hate?


I'm sorry but I don't understand this sentence.

The baker being born a baker was a joke in response to your sarcastic post.


I don't understand how you cannot grasp this simple concept:

Being forced to do work, that you do not want to do, is slavery.





I hate to tell you this, but homosexuals are not a recent development. Read up on Ancient Greece- you may find it either horrifying or weird and confusing in ways you'd rather not discuss.


Thanks for your condescending remark which has nothing to do with my statement.

Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years.

Gay marriage has not.




Um...


Sorry but I don't respond to anything on ATS that starts with um....




Yes, there is prejudice in the gay community. Does that make them appropriate targets for prejudice? If so, there is also murder in the gay community- you could take them out and make your god very happy and the courts wouldn't be able to argue with your ironclad defense.


So you think I want to murder gay people to make my god happy?

I am honestly offended by that assertion.

Is this how you became a super moderator by making assumptions and putting words in peoples mouths?




To clarify my viewpoint,


I believe that no individual should be forced to service another.

I don't think that a community that practices prejudice should throw stones in a glass house.

I would never murder a gay person.

I think Vagabond, you're debate skills leave much to be desired.
edit on 9-11-2013 by dusty1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   
I absolutely think a PRIVATE business should be able to serve whom they want to serve and for whatever reasons, and as one poster said, word will get out and either a niche for that business will be filled or they will go out of business.

I am a "christian" and for me I think the business involving wedding cakes made a huge mistake to witness the love of God. Jesus said :

Mat 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
Mat 25:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
Mat 25:33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Mat 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
Mat 25:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
Mat 25:36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
Mat 25:37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
Mat 25:38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
Mat 25:39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
Mat 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Mat 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Mat 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
Mat 25:43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Mat 25:44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Mat 25:45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.


I highly question the devotion to the love of our Lord and Savior of those who would judge others and not treat one another with love and kindness.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:44 PM
link   

TKDRL
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


Not sure I am understanding here. You are saying someone that rents or owns a shop are more obligated to serve everyone, than someone like me who runs my business out of my home?



Yes, partly because of the public nature of their business and partly because of the nature of the transaction.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join