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.
NavyDoc
kaylaluv
macman
reply to post by kaylaluv
So you move from just shooting people because of their Race to the anarchy tactic.
Man, you are very very predictable.
Well, what's right or wrong is just an opinion, according to NavyDoc.
No, I've been pointing out that they are absolutes. You are the one who adjusts your opinion on right and wrong depending on who is involved.
kaylaluv
These are absolutes:
It is always wrong to discriminate against anyone.
It is never wrong to discriminate against anyone.
Which one of those absolutes do you agree with?
They're not comparable because ones an inanimate object and the other is a human characteristic. Objects can be left at home or some other place; human characteristics not so much. Gun owners can still get served if they don't bring their guns with them into the establishment; the other guys, not so much.
NavyDoc
technical difficulties
Actually, it's not the same. As Ewok said, you can leave your guns in the car or at home. The sign says no guns allowed, not no gun owners allowed. There's a huge difference between banning a person and banning a object.
NavyDoc
crazyewok
NavyDoc
Now, I wonder what the response would be if one changed "gun owners" to "gays" or "African Americans." Would people still say, "his store, his rules?"
You can leave a gun at home if you really want to go. You cant stop being black, a women or gay (though diffrent debate on that one) ect Basicaly huge diffrent between a OBJECT you can leave or a inbuilt human traite you cant change. So unless you were born with a gun for a hand your argument dont hold water.
It holds plenty of water. I both cases the business owners decide to refuse business to different sets of people simply because they do not like them. It is hypocritical to say that one business owner should make that decision for himself but another business owner does not. You are making a decision based on what you like and what you don't feel comfortable with.
I agree that any business should make their own decisions whether I like them or not. If I do not agree with their decision, I will take my business elsewhere. This is freedom.
I agree that business owners have the right to discriminate, but comparing those two situations is a pretty simple minded thing to do.
I disagree. You think they are not comparable because you don't want to face the fact of the hypocrisy in the leftist stance: take away choice you don't like but support choice you do.
I've been consistent: the business owner should be the one who decides who or what he wants to do business with. You guys have been picking and choosing which groups get protected status and which groups do not.
Sovaka
This is no different to when a cafe banned mothers from openly breast feeding in their establishments.
Only in this case, it is guns.
Guns at the moment, are a hot political topic.
Expect it to be sensationalized.
TDawgRex
reply to post by usernameconspiracy
I would not be committing a felony whatsoever. At the most, I would be committing a misdemeanor. And again, I I am carrying concealed, they would have no idea that I am armed.
fenson76
Sovaka
This is no different to when a cafe banned mothers from openly breast feeding in their establishments.
Only in this case, it is guns.
Guns at the moment, are a hot political topic.
Expect it to be sensationalized.
I am on your side with this but seriously...your argument is lacking. I've never heard of a breast accidentally going off in a drunk persons hand or seeing a breast blow someones head off because of a bar fight.
technical difficulties
They're not comparable because ones an inanimate object and the other is a human characteristic. Objects can be left at home or some other place; human characteristics not so much. Gun owners can still get served if they don't bring their guns with them into the establishment; the other guys, not so much.
NavyDoc
technical difficulties
Actually, it's not the same. As Ewok said, you can leave your guns in the car or at home. The sign says no guns allowed, not no gun owners allowed. There's a huge difference between banning a person and banning a object.
NavyDoc
crazyewok
NavyDoc
Now, I wonder what the response would be if one changed "gun owners" to "gays" or "African Americans." Would people still say, "his store, his rules?"
You can leave a gun at home if you really want to go. You cant stop being black, a women or gay (though diffrent debate on that one) ect Basicaly huge diffrent between a OBJECT you can leave or a inbuilt human traite you cant change. So unless you were born with a gun for a hand your argument dont hold water.
It holds plenty of water. I both cases the business owners decide to refuse business to different sets of people simply because they do not like them. It is hypocritical to say that one business owner should make that decision for himself but another business owner does not. You are making a decision based on what you like and what you don't feel comfortable with.
I agree that any business should make their own decisions whether I like them or not. If I do not agree with their decision, I will take my business elsewhere. This is freedom.
I agree that business owners have the right to discriminate, but comparing those two situations is a pretty simple minded thing to do.
I disagree. You think they are not comparable because you don't want to face the fact of the hypocrisy in the leftist stance: take away choice you don't like but support choice you do.
I've been consistent: the business owner should be the one who decides who or what he wants to do business with. You guys have been picking and choosing which groups get protected status and which groups do not.
I will gladly post pictures of humans and guns if you still have trouble understanding the difference between the two.
edit on 3-1-2014 by technical difficulties because: (no reason given)
kaylaluv
NavyDoc
kaylaluv
macman
reply to post by kaylaluv
So you move from just shooting people because of their Race to the anarchy tactic.
Man, you are very very predictable.
Well, what's right or wrong is just an opinion, according to NavyDoc.
No, I've been pointing out that they are absolutes. You are the one who adjusts your opinion on right and wrong depending on who is involved.
These are absolutes:
It is always wrong to kill someone.
It is never wrong to kill someone.
Which one of those absolutes do you agree with?
And you still don't get it. Alright, I'm going to take a different approach on this.
NavyDoc
technical difficulties
They're not comparable because ones an inanimate object and the other is a human characteristic. Objects can be left at home or some other place; human characteristics not so much. Gun owners can still get served if they don't bring their guns with them into the establishment; the other guys, not so much.
NavyDoc
technical difficulties
Actually, it's not the same. As Ewok said, you can leave your guns in the car or at home. The sign says no guns allowed, not no gun owners allowed. There's a huge difference between banning a person and banning a object.
NavyDoc
crazyewok
NavyDoc
Now, I wonder what the response would be if one changed "gun owners" to "gays" or "African Americans." Would people still say, "his store, his rules?"
You can leave a gun at home if you really want to go. You cant stop being black, a women or gay (though diffrent debate on that one) ect Basicaly huge diffrent between a OBJECT you can leave or a inbuilt human traite you cant change. So unless you were born with a gun for a hand your argument dont hold water.
It holds plenty of water. I both cases the business owners decide to refuse business to different sets of people simply because they do not like them. It is hypocritical to say that one business owner should make that decision for himself but another business owner does not. You are making a decision based on what you like and what you don't feel comfortable with.
I agree that any business should make their own decisions whether I like them or not. If I do not agree with their decision, I will take my business elsewhere. This is freedom.
I agree that business owners have the right to discriminate, but comparing those two situations is a pretty simple minded thing to do.
I disagree. You think they are not comparable because you don't want to face the fact of the hypocrisy in the leftist stance: take away choice you don't like but support choice you do.
I've been consistent: the business owner should be the one who decides who or what he wants to do business with. You guys have been picking and choosing which groups get protected status and which groups do not.
I will gladly post pictures of humans and guns if you still have trouble understanding the difference between the two.
edit on 3-1-2014 by technical difficulties because: (no reason given)
Shrug. Again, you discriminate on things you don't like. Your snarky attitude and lack of courtesy aside, you accept discrimination as long as you agree with the discrimination and can justify it in your own mind.
NavyDoc
It's always wrong to kill someone. Sometimes bad people leave you no choice however.
kaylaluv
NavyDoc
It's always wrong to kill someone. Sometimes bad people leave you no choice however.
Well that's an absolute with a qualifier if I ever saw one.
edit on 7-1-2014 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)