It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Congrats, Bigots... Kansas Has Your Back!

page: 15
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:23 PM

Bad as I hate to say it, bigots have the same rights as everybody else, as long as they aren't hurting nobody. I think it's a clear-cut case of rights.

That is true, nobody has the right to refuse service based on discrimination. They already have the same rights.

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:45 PM
The tolerance of those with views different from ones own is pretty thin here. Since I disagree with you, that makes me a bigot, racist, Neanderthal and whatever else you want to call me. Wow! All I did was have an opinion different than yours.

I must be a demon.

Your intolerance is showing.

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:52 PM


Bad as I hate to say it, bigots have the same rights as everybody else, as long as they aren't hurting nobody. I think it's a clear-cut case of rights.

That is true, nobody has the right to refuse service based on discrimination. They already have the same rights.

People are refused service all the time the reason doesnt have to be stated.And true everyone has the same rights including not having their rights infringed on by others rights. So please tell me how refusing to participate in an event is infringing on someone's rights. See this bill isnt about discrimination as far as i read this just gives a person the legal protection to not participate or aid in an event thats illegal in Kansas.Until the legalization of same sex marriage in Kansas this is perfectly logical bill to pass. This prevents the federal government from trying to intercede into a decision they think belongs to the state. This bill only came about to protect their citizens from the federal government.This bill would disappear if they legalize samesexmarriage. But people want to say Kansas is bigots truth is then so is 35 other states that dont recognize same sex marriage i guess.Then we have states like indiana that currently is passing a bill to ban it. Because the bottom line is most people dont agree with same sex marriage. And even in states where it is allowed when brought to popular vote is turned down even California voted down legalization of gay marriage. This was overturned by a judge and will indeed be heard in the supreme court. This means a federal judge overturned the state's wishes. Me personally i dont know why but you cant argue with popular vote.The supreme court has been avoiding this as i would frankly because there is no constitutional basis for marriage.
edit on 2/17/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:54 PM
reply to post by Fylgje

I as a hillbilly I am offended. Plus you just insulted all Nebraskans. Kansas is Jawhawker territory not cornhusker.

All of your labels are offensive. Just call me sentient being.

I am soooooo offended I think I will contact the ACLU and stage a protest.

edit on 17-2-2014 by Idahomie because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:55 PM

reply to post by Cuervo

The problem with that mentality is that none of these businesses are on private islands. They are supplied by roads I pay for, protected by police I pay for, and is being supported by money created by our public economy.

Not unless you happen to live in Kansas.

Besides them evil Christians also pay property taxes too.

Hmmm. So we have an economy that is going down the tubes due to liberal progressive actions yet here we see people turning away customers. I guess maybe the economy isn't that bad. Or wait a minute, isn't it that Christians are super persecuted in this country or, err, ah, oh, I guess I got all mixed up by this message. Maybe it's the Christians persecuting those they don't like and by way of their actions they are tanking the economy. Seems fairly reasonable.


posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:56 PM

If I were an American I would just draw a line through the middle and call the south Racistbigotland, and be done with it. Why waste any more time and energy on these fools? You want to progress? You want peace? It won't happen as long as you allow backward politicians to have any kind of 'power'.

And you'd be an absolute fool.

I mean honestly are you takin' the piss? You don't think it's at all ironic to take an elitist stand against bigotry, and whilst doing so paint a massive geographic area with your brush-o-hatred? LOL how rich....

Quite disappointing to see you're from Scotland, one of my favorite places to visit, and one where I have lots of family and friends.

I suppose you also think only lowlanders are capable of having an IQ over 100 and all highlanders are are backwards simpleton savages eh?

You can take your attitude and shove it. The south has some of the best damn people you will ever meet in the USA, or anywhere for that matter. But don't bother visiting please, I'd rather we not be subjected to your elitist view double standard nonsense.

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 08:02 PM
reply to post by Cuervo

I find cases like this to be confusing because within the bonds of society we like to place tolerance on a pedestal.

Keeping that in mind, I'm going to play Devil's advocate here and argue that it is well within the rights of the citizens of that states to make such a move. They are protected by our constitution to believe whatever the hell they want.

So now people are getting the panties in a bunch because now we have a case where you have to tolerate people who are not only intolerant but that you also don't want to tolerate. Who wants to tolerate the beliefs of bigots? Then again, how do you think a bigot feels when rights are given to people they don't want to tolerate?

Well apparently a state full of bigots feels this way. One might argue that this goes against the constitutional rights of the homesexual community to believe what they want in that state. However, if the majority of citizens voted on it to be the way it is then is it not democracy at work? They aren't banning people from being gay, they're just banning public displays of gay couples in resteraunts. Granted, I'm not FOR this, I don't think it's good nor do I think it's very progressive. That being said. I think Kansas may arguably have the right to do this even if we don't want to tolerate it.
edit on 17-2-2014 by GrimReaper86 because: (no reason given)

This is arguably why groups like the kkk are still allowed to exist.
edit on 17-2-2014 by GrimReaper86 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 08:06 PM

reply to post by Krazysh0t

Apologies to the 'south' in that case, I didn't realise Kansas was so central. I don't think the old stereotypes are all that much different to what I see and read on a daily basis though. There are clearly issues which need addressing. I don't understand why you don't just split the country into two or maybe three, it seems the most logical thing to do. Political opinion is sometimes wrong, and inherently it seems to be wrong most of the time in the south and mid-west regions.

I suggest you leave the keyboard and come visit America if you really want to know something about it.

And the nation doesn't need to be split in two or three. It was founded as a UNION of independent states with independent governments. i.e. It's already split into 50 and we fight quite hard to keep DC from federalizing every damn thing, much the way you fight the EU from dictating every damn sausage eaten or giraffe killed.

You live in a nation of 5million. I live in a metropolitan area of 5.6million.

Local gov't is good, central gov't is bad.

Stop trying to legislate emotion. If a business is hateful it will hurt them.

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 08:42 PM
I am not a gay male so why should I care about a movement/mission to oppress gays??..simple... injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere and that include a threat to me and mine for obvious historical reasons if I don't speak out and try to nip this in the bud, who will be there for me when the mission to oppress gays becomes mission creep to oppress me, for although many here are confident this will not stand, and maybe they are right, it sure can linger for a very long time,again see what they tried to push (mission creep),not just private business concerns but government institutions.

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 09:02 PM
Pretty complicated issue. I think it really boils down to where the lines are drawn. What constitutes public vs private institutions?

What is a business in the eyes of the law? It's mixed, is it not? That makes thing difficult.

I agree religious people should have every right to believe whatever garbage they wish, and to the extent it does not interfere with the basic civil and human rights of others. Their freedom to be ends when they deny others the civil and human rights to be. Then it becomes discrimination, which is legally and socially unacceptable.

I totally agree that churches should have every right to refuse to perform weddings for gay people. There are some business situations where I also believe a person should have the right to refuse to do business. Like, a private practice lawyer should be able to refuse to represent a case he is morally against.

But where do we draw the line? Let's say you are the only laundromat in town, you are religious, and refuse to allow gay people to do their laundry there. They have no place else to go, so ultimately, you are denying them service. What if you are the sole internet provider in an area, but refuse service to gays based on your religion? Then it becomes a matter of depriving people of the only access to a service or product that is offered to everyone else.

So again, I ask, where do you draw the line? No one has to like gay people, its their freedom to hate whoever they wish. But they have no right to block access to stuff everyone else has based on hate.

Will government offices and workers start claiming its against their religion to file a gay person's property tax, or give them a driver's license?

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 09:04 PM

Christian Voice
reply to post by muse7

No I did not. I was born a normal natural person. Normal and natural is heterosexual in order to procreate. To sway from this takes a choice, not a gene.

I don't think you really believe you should judge anyone, simply not do the behaviors you feel wrong yourself. Leave the judging to the judge and show love to everyone even the most dreaded sinner.

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 09:29 PM
I understand businessmen have a right to refuse service to people. I agree with it.

BUT, it shouldn't be based on prejudice or bigotry. You shouldn't have to turn everyone within a certain group away simply because they're in that group. Weather it be racial, religious, et cetera. It should be based on their behavior and their actions.

People love to run around screaming about their rights. Yet the law of the land that was implemented long ago in this country, which most of these same people love to babble about clearly states all men are created equal. Not all except homosexual people. Not all except Asian people or black people, or European. EVERYONE.

Seems to me fighting for other peoples rights is what's patriotic. Not trying to strip them away from each other based on trivial garbage.

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 10:30 PM
While I will agree that it is short-sighted (from a business standpoint) and ignorant for a private business to deny service to someone based on race, religion and sexual orientation, I think they should have the right to do so. They should also have protection against lawsuits against them based on denying said services. I know that sounds awful to some of you, but I prefer to think of it as a slow-release poison pill for the business. Regardless of my or your personal feelings on the matter the general public is more and more accepting of "alternate" lifestyles. The bigot business owner who choose to conduct their businesses in a bigoted manner will find themselves with less and less customers and will eventually fall by the wayside. I don't understand the compulsion to be gay, but then as a heterosexual there no real reason I should. I'm not a huge gay-rights advocate, but I would not buy goods or services from any individual or business that refused someone just because they were gay. I don't think I'm alone either.

Let the bigots hide in their businesses and turn away those they don't want to serve and they will wither and die. If a baker refuses to bake a gay couple a cake, why would any other gay couple want to give them their business anyway. Suing the bigots does nothing but deepen their hatred as well as embolden those that support them. Giving them the right to deny service is a bitter pill that will actually get us past the intolerance faster in my opinion.

I was raised a Christian in SE TN (running on the pews, speaking in tounges churches), so I've seen intolerance first hand. I don't really participate in organized religion anymore, but there are some good lessons I took from that time of my life that I think apply here; Do unto others as you would have them do unto you and judge not lest ye be judged. Let the haters hate, they are a dying breed anyway.
edit on 2/17/2014 by yadboy because: grammar

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 10:53 PM
reply to post by ThinkYouSpeak

I was just going to mention that, doesn't anyone ever notice almost any establishment has a sign that says "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone!"
Like you said, it is the business owners right and it isn't going to be profitable to turn people they term 'undesirable' away, but it is their right!
Some guy friends of mine in the 80's stopped into a lesbian bar (originally they didn't know) and they were heckled and picked on until the bartender (who could have splattered one of my small friends) told them they were bothering their clientele, and since they 'reserved the right to refuse service to anyone' they were NOT welcome there and to get out!
When they were leaving, everyone in the place started clapping and yelling "Good, the DXXX's are leaving!" So, it works both ways... they were not any better than those that say gay people aren't welcome in their establishments!
edit on 17-2-2014 by wulff because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 12:33 AM

I understand businessmen have a right to refuse service to people. I agree with it.

BUT, it shouldn't be based on prejudice or bigotry. You shouldn't have to turn everyone within a certain group away simply because they're in that group. Weather it be racial, religious, et cetera. It should be based on their behavior and their actions.

What is it about freedom that you don't understand???

In one breath you declare people should have freedom, yet in the next you say it should be the freedom to be TOLD HOW TO BE FREE...

I'm not picking on you, but seriously go back and read your post. Modern day Americans seem incapable of swallowing reality, the reality that you can't have things both ways.

It's the same as people who always overprotect their kids. Let the damn kid fall down, and play and get dirty for god's sake!!

Let the business owners shoot themselves in the foot!!!! Why are we always trying to over regulate every damn thing??? The world has been DAMN GOOD at self regulation for a LONG LONG time.

Find the 'How wolves change rivers' video (it's recently on ATS) for a great example how much humans fck everything up when we meddle.

posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 01:23 AM
reply to post by Idahomie

Welcome to ATS! Haha, that's how the majority of threads on ATS are. If you have an opposing view, a view that doesn't "mesh" with the popular view, than sir you are a bigot/racist/what have you!

As someone else mentioned previously, this thread is a perfect example of bigots arguing with other bigots. Oh ATS, how I wish "Deny Ignorance" was taken seriously around here.

posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 02:52 AM
Ive come to resolve on this is pretty quickly and for me it is quite simple now..... So this is directed to those who, like the people of Kansas, feel the same way about homosexuality and homosexual civil rights. I can only say to you keep your damned laws.
Keep them and so keep yourself in chains you alone have put there. Keep on tightening them up. I wont try to stop you anymore.
If that's what you/Kansas really want to do then DO IT. You, and you alone, are responsible. Your ultimately not hurting me, or any other GLBTQ person anyway... you are only deepening the prison you will have to one day cut yourself free from. Adding to the amount of sorrys that will one day bubble out of your mouth when 'real god' shows and you see what you really do do.

I've already cut free of this jail and the self imprisoning cycle that kept leading me back there...and to those who actively want to stay in it, and are trying to force everyone around them to join them in it....I can only say, NO. "You bought it, you wear it. I'm done." My life is not run by the USMC code and I can and will leave you behind to rot as I know I cant fight YOUR choice to stay there. God isn't doing this or demanding this YOU are.

Ive tried to be a good person, be a voice of balance and well reasoned, to care about what happens to people and to society as whole when this type of thing happens and people do this to themselves, but right now..I couldn't give a flying frak. You want to self harm this way and lock yourself in jail, GO FOR IT! Just dont for a second think that when you beat on a gay person, bully and slander them, murder them or debase them by refusing basic civil and social rights or human rights, that you're doing it for "God" or for any 'good'. You aren't, you don't. You're just padding your jail cell and lying to yourself. Worse, you know you're lying to yourself. People who are gay are not the problem, we are just the latest in a long list of the unfortunate recipients of your unsolved and unresolved problems.

In reality, you make laws and act this way because more than anything are afraid. You do it for power...because power like my lovers tongue, it is addictive, it feels good and you want more of it. You do it because the state is taking your power from you now and the only way to get that power hit and feel good feeling back is to prey on those you think are weaker than you....because you think you WANT to, just like any junkie, but it isn't even a real want, you do know better than to hurt people for no its a NEED you express when you force yourself into denial of what you know and beat down others to raise yourself up and try to force others to think as you do, be as you are.

Its more than just the sickness of sameness. You really do still need others to meet this addiction to power and control need for you, because you haven't ever learned any another way to help yourself to help yourself. You do it to make yourself think you are safe, to maintain the illusion of being safe, you need to control others in order to feel in control of things that in the light of day are way beyond your control anyway. You do it because you have been thoroughly conditioned to do it.

You do it because you have claimed a Right to, one that was never yours to claim in the first place - the right to choose for God what God wants on this planet and all the while your playing god in the lives of others, underneath that red neck, pale face or blue white or red collar, is a full on screaming COWARD.....a being too afraid to challenge his faith, his self created belief and perceptions, a being too cowardly and mentally lazy to actually work to think, to grow up and mature as you are obligated to. A being too fearful to look even God in the eye and say "NO" I dont want to hurt other people because you or anyone else says so! - so a person then that cant even think for himself or stand up by himself. Yet you rush to call yourself a 'man' or a woman' pffft. You have no idea what these terms even mean.

You do it because you are a person, so crippled by fear, that you would sell your soul to eugenicist ideals and nazist ideology, and spit on the sacrifice of our grandfathers, just to embrace enough illusory control to make it all go away so you can get on with what you call life and sleep soundly while denying life to others. You cant even see the fail in hard it is for you to deny your own natural conscience in this're just a prisoner in your own head...and I for one pity 'you'. I have no have the same CHOICE in staying or leaving prison I do....use it or not, I'm done.

Whatever these laws will do, in the now or how they will affect the future, even if they mean I eat alone and shop at the 'gays only store' or one day even get murdered at the hands of some legally sanctioned self justifying bigoted abuser one day - as kids are dying in Russia right now under the same type of sexual apartheid laws- I will still LIVE and I will still die, free.

posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 03:10 AM
If you want the freedom to deny service to a group of people, then either move to a place where that is acceptable or buy an island and have at it.

I am almost certain no one would miss you.

However in most 1st world countries, that crap doesn't fly....nor should it.

P.S. - Calling a duck a duck doesn't make the accuser a duck also. Quit with the twisted logic.

posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 03:39 AM

Wow. So now we can all rest easy knowing that gay people won't be eating next to us in the greasy hillbilly spoon down the street when we visit Kansas.

They just passed Bill 2453 which allows businesses to ban gay couples. IT PASSED! I guess if you are nostalgic and you want to relive a bit of the Jim Crow era prejudices, you know have a destination resort right there in Kansas.

Utterly ridiculous - how can the government make it LEGAL to do something that the government has NO RIGHT to make laws about.

If you run a business you can prohibit anyone you want from coming onto your property - its PRIVATE PROPERTY! So if you want to exclude black people, jews, gays whatever - IT IS YOUR RIGHT!

If their is some law that says you dont have a right to refuse service to anyone you want, for any reason - then you have no freedom at all.

I dont agree with excluding people based on sexual orientation or religion or race - but I sure as hell defend peoples right to decide who comes onto their own PRIVATE PROPERTY.
edit on 18-2-2014 by Amagnon because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 18 2014 @ 03:43 AM
The Kansas Senate has stated that the majority of Senators would vote no, so the Bill won't even be heard.
I still want a divorce.
Draconian Theocracy ----> thata way.

top topics

<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in