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.

 

Congrats, Bigots... Kansas Has Your Back!

page: 7
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 10:54 PM
link   

slednecktx
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Don't shoot the messenger but Leviticus 20:13 " if a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must both be put to death; their blood will be on their heads"


The bible also has this passage:

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death."

Have you helped your local town of Christians stone any stubborn and rebellious children to death lately?




posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by TheConspiracyPages
 


reply to post by WP4YT
 


Personal freedom stops and ends with you, the person. When upon exercising your freedoms, you infringe on someone else's freedoms you are wrong. Denying service to another person due to some innate difference between the two people is infringing on someone's freedoms. The freedom to travel anywhere and buy and sell anywhere.

I mean you might as well be arguing in favor of Jim Crow laws. Look how well those worked out for our country.


What freedoms are being infringed? I would be willing to bet that is not the only restaurant in the country.

If it wasn't for the owner of the restaurant, that restaurant wouldn't even be available for gay couples to eat in at all. So why are we telling the owner how to run his business?

The logic here is astounding.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:02 PM
link   

WP4YT

Krazysh0t
reply to post by TheConspiracyPages
 


reply to post by WP4YT
 


Personal freedom stops and ends with you, the person. When upon exercising your freedoms, you infringe on someone else's freedoms you are wrong. Denying service to another person due to some innate difference between the two people is infringing on someone's freedoms. The freedom to travel anywhere and buy and sell anywhere.

I mean you might as well be arguing in favor of Jim Crow laws. Look how well those worked out for our country.


What freedoms are being infringed? I would be willing to bet that is not the only restaurant in the country.

If it wasn't for the owner of the restaurant, that restaurant wouldn't even be available for gay couples to eat in at all. So why are we telling the owner how to run his business?

The logic here is astounding.


Because if one restaurant starts doing it, then that means the another restaurant will start doing it and so on and so forth. AGAIN we have literal evidence of this taking place in our immediate past. I will now mention the Jim Crow laws to you for a THIRD time while responding you. Do you think racial segregation was Constitutional and ok? I notice you are cleverly ignoring this point, but in reality that is what you are advocating. How long after this law is passed before we see signs on every street corner saying "No gays" with all the "gays acceptable" locations located in the poor part of town with the bars on the window? Gotta have separate bathrooms, can't risk one of those gays looking at me pee and getting off on it. I'm not making any of this logic up either, this is the EXACT same logic that was used to make Jim Crow laws legal and to justify segregation.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:02 PM
link   
I think it is funny that in today's thinking, that someone condemning perversion is considered a bigot.. Me saying this isn't the popular attitude, but it is right. To me anyways.. I don't care how that makes anyone feel either. If a person approves of allowing same sex couples to flaunt their affection in public, that's a person's choice. A lot of places would also not tolerate hetero couples from doing the same thing.. I'm not going to be one of the crowd that goes whatever way the wind blows.

It started with people just not talking about it.

Then they wanted to tell everyone.
Next they wanted to get everyone to accept it.
Next they want it to be considered right and not immoral.
Next they want to marry each other.
Now they want to flaunt it in public.
What's next?
Why can't they just STHU? then everyone would be happy? nope cuz they want to cram it into everyone's brains and then some.

I'm not saying I don't respect a person's right to choose their own way of living, I'm saying I don't want to see it, or hear about it, just like they don't want to see people flashing signs against them. Either one is perpetuating a feud.
edit on 16-2-2014 by alienreality because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Christian Voice
reply to post by rupertg
 


God did not create gays and lesbians. They choose to be that way. Anyone that chooses to be that way is insulting God by going against the natural uses of his creation.

edit on 16-2-2014 by Christian Voice because: (no reason given)


Oh yeah the whole God created man is his own image thing. In that case God must be 90% stupid and 10% genius because that is how humanity turned out. If you know your bible then it should be pretty obvious Gods at least a little gay.
Only 1 out of 10 will get it.
edit on 16-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 





Because if one restaurant starts doing it, then that means the another restaurant will start doing it and so on and so forth. AGAIN we have literal evidence of this taking place in our immediate past. I will now mention the Jim Crow laws to you for a THIRD time while responding you. Do you think racial segregation was Constitutional and ok? I notice you are cleverly ignoring this point, but in reality that is what you are advocating. How long after this law is passed before we see signs on every street corner saying "No gays" with all the "gays acceptable" locations located in the poor part of town with the bars on the window? Gotta have separate bathrooms, can't risk one of those gays looking at me pee and getting off on it. I'm not making any of this logic up either, this is the EXACT same logic that was used to make Jim Crow laws legal and to justify segregation


Were you not the one that posted a link to a Wikipedia article about the "slippery slope fallacy"?



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Grimpachi

Christian Voice
reply to post by rupertg
 


God did not create gays and lesbians. They choose to be that way. Anyone that chooses to be that way is insulting God by going against the natural uses of his creation.

edit on 16-2-2014 by Christian Voice because: (no reason given)


Oh yeah the whole God created man is his own image thing. In that case God must be 90% stupid and 10% genius because that is how humanity turned out. If you know your bible then it should be pretty obvious Gods at least a little gay.

edit on 16-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)


Actually you are not correct. What you are saying is only valid for animals, as they just do whatever they feel like. Humanity has the ability to choose between right and wrong, unlike an animal. That is the big difference.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


This is a clear violation of the civil rights act of 1964 and should be struck down by the supreme court. Also, against the counter argument, this is not a first amendment rights issue. A person choosing to be gay does not infringe on your religion. You are not being forced to be gay.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Krazysh0t

WP4YT

Krazysh0t
reply to post by TheConspiracyPages
 


reply to post by WP4YT
 


Personal freedom stops and ends with you, the person. When upon exercising your freedoms, you infringe on someone else's freedoms you are wrong. Denying service to another person due to some innate difference between the two people is infringing on someone's freedoms. The freedom to travel anywhere and buy and sell anywhere.

I mean you might as well be arguing in favor of Jim Crow laws. Look how well those worked out for our country.


What freedoms are being infringed? I would be willing to bet that is not the only restaurant in the country.

If it wasn't for the owner of the restaurant, that restaurant wouldn't even be available for gay couples to eat in at all. So why are we telling the owner how to run his business?

The logic here is astounding.


Because if one restaurant starts doing it, then that means the another restaurant will start doing it and so on and so forth. AGAIN we have literal evidence of this taking place in our immediate past. I will now mention the Jim Crow laws to you for a THIRD time while responding you. Do you think racial segregation was Constitutional and ok? I notice you are cleverly ignoring this point, but in reality that is what you are advocating. How long after this law is passed before we see signs on every street corner saying "No gays" with all the "gays acceptable" locations located in the poor part of town with the bars on the window? Gotta have separate bathrooms, can't risk one of those gays looking at me pee and getting off on it. I'm not making any of this logic up either, this is the EXACT same logic that was used to make Jim Crow laws legal and to justify segregation.


If that were to really happen, I don't see it as a bad thing. It would just mean some gay guy could open up a restaurant that serves gay people, and make a killing. With his new fortune, he could donate some money to the gay community. Maybe with enough effort, they could reverse the process and make gay only places the norm, and hetero places the rarity. Sounds far fetched, but true freedom allows that. Those with enough willpower succeed, and those that don't fail.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by TheConspiracyPages
 


It isn't a fallacy when that is the only logical outcome of that situation. In that case it is just a logically deduced chain of events. We even have evidence that that outcome will happen.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:13 PM
link   

WP4YT

What freedoms are being infringed? I would be willing to bet that is not the only restaurant in the country.

If it wasn't for the owner of the restaurant, that restaurant wouldn't even be available for gay couples to eat in at all. So why are we telling the owner how to run his business?

The logic here is astounding.


The freedom to walk into a public establishment without the fear of persecution......



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:13 PM
link   

alienreality

Grimpachi

Christian Voice
reply to post by rupertg
 


God did not create gays and lesbians. They choose to be that way. Anyone that chooses to be that way is insulting God by going against the natural uses of his creation.

edit on 16-2-2014 by Christian Voice because: (no reason given)


Oh yeah the whole God created man is his own image thing. In that case God must be 90% stupid and 10% genius because that is how humanity turned out. If you know your bible then it should be pretty obvious Gods at least a little gay.

edit on 16-2-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)


Actually you are not correct. What you are saying is only valid for animals, as they just do whatever they feel like. Humanity has the ability to choose between right and wrong, unlike an animal. That is the big difference.


Humans are animals. Our definition of right and wrong is only what we think it is. Who made humans the deciders of what's right and wrong?



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Ack and im drawn back in

So There is a difference between state sponsored and law enforced " bigotry" aka jim crow

And personal bigotry

BIG Difference!

One is used to suppress

The other is a personal belief

As long as you can vote , walk down the street and engage in making a living etc etc who is to say what you can or cant do?

Should ANY public institution from the library to the pools to the voting booth to the beach etc etc ban entrance for any reason that is wrong.

We ALL pay for these things hence PUBLIC

BUT a private business IS NOT PUBLIC and bigotry is a personal right.

I dont have to like you. I dont have to feed you

But I cant stop you from voting or using any other PUBLIC facilities because yiu also own them

That is the difference between jim crow laws and Jim crows bar.
edit on pm220142811America/ChicagoSun, 16 Feb 2014 23:19:23 -0600_2u by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:17 PM
link   

WP4YT

Krazysh0t

WP4YT

Krazysh0t
reply to post by TheConspiracyPages
 


reply to post by WP4YT
 


Personal freedom stops and ends with you, the person. When upon exercising your freedoms, you infringe on someone else's freedoms you are wrong. Denying service to another person due to some innate difference between the two people is infringing on someone's freedoms. The freedom to travel anywhere and buy and sell anywhere.

I mean you might as well be arguing in favor of Jim Crow laws. Look how well those worked out for our country.


What freedoms are being infringed? I would be willing to bet that is not the only restaurant in the country.

If it wasn't for the owner of the restaurant, that restaurant wouldn't even be available for gay couples to eat in at all. So why are we telling the owner how to run his business?

The logic here is astounding.


Because if one restaurant starts doing it, then that means the another restaurant will start doing it and so on and so forth. AGAIN we have literal evidence of this taking place in our immediate past. I will now mention the Jim Crow laws to you for a THIRD time while responding you. Do you think racial segregation was Constitutional and ok? I notice you are cleverly ignoring this point, but in reality that is what you are advocating. How long after this law is passed before we see signs on every street corner saying "No gays" with all the "gays acceptable" locations located in the poor part of town with the bars on the window? Gotta have separate bathrooms, can't risk one of those gays looking at me pee and getting off on it. I'm not making any of this logic up either, this is the EXACT same logic that was used to make Jim Crow laws legal and to justify segregation.


If that were to really happen, I don't see it as a bad thing. It would just mean some gay guy could open up a restaurant that serves gay people, and make a killing. With his new fortune, he could donate some money to the gay community. Maybe with enough effort, they could reverse the process and make gay only places the norm, and hetero places the rarity. Sounds far fetched, but true freedom allows that. Those with enough willpower succeed, and those that don't fail.


What fantasy land do you live in? The land I live in, the people on top tend to like to stay that way and do anything in their power to assure themselves of that edge. They do this through government. This whole debate started with a bill from government, so we have precedent that they are willing to pass legislation in support of intolerance. So now they just get government to change zoning districts to have gay only districts and hetero only districts. Oh the gay only district is next to an industrial waste dumping ground? Oh so sorry, nothing we can do.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Ramcheck
 


Hey now not all of us southerners are bigots..... Just those of the tea bagger, nascar hat wearing, republican kind. Sadly the loudest of the bigotry does share my accent. :p



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:19 PM
link   

WP4YT

If that were to really happen, I don't see it as a bad thing. It would just mean some "BLACK" guy could open up a restaurant that serves "BLACK" people, and make a killing. With his new fortune, he could donate some money to the "BLACK" community. Maybe with enough effort, they could reverse the process and make "BLACK" only places the norm, and hetero places the rarity. Sounds far fetched, but true freedom allows that. Those with enough willpower succeed, and those that don't fail.


The bolded emphasis are mine, substituting the word black instead of gay. Please explain how this law is not setting our society back 50 years



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


You are purposely being obtuse

I deny your ignorance

Good day



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Another_Nut
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Ack and im drawn back in

So
1 . There is a difference between state sponsored and law enforced " bigotry" aka jim crow

And personal bigotry

BIG Difference!

One is used to suppress

The other is a personal belief

As long as you can vote , walk down the street and engage in making a living etc etc who is to say what you can or cant do?

Should ANY public institution from the library to the pools to the voting booth to the beach etc etc that is wrong.

We ALL pay for these things hence PUBLIC

BUT a private business IS NOT PUBLIC and bigotry is a personal right.

I dont have to like you. I dont have to feed you

But I cant stop you from voting or using any other PUBLIC facilities because yiu also own them

That is the difference between jim crow laws and Jim crows bar.


Semantics:

Jim Crow laws


The Jim Crow laws were racial segregation laws enacted between 1876 and 1965 in the United States at the state and local level. They mandated de jure racial segregation in all public facilities in Southern states of the former Confederacy, with, starting in 1890, a "separate but equal" status for African Americans. The separation in practice led to conditions for African Americans that tended to be inferior to those provided for white Americans, systematizing a number of economic, educational and social disadvantages. De jure segregation mainly applied to the Southern United States. While Northern segregation was generally de facto, there were patterns of segregation in housing enforced by covenants, bank lending practices, and job discrimination, including discriminatory union practices for decades.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:25 PM
link   

WP4YT
If that were to really happen, I don't see it as a bad thing. It would just mean some gay guy could open up a restaurant that serves gay people, and make a killing. With his new fortune, he could donate some money to the gay community. Maybe with enough effort, they could reverse the process and make gay only places the norm, and hetero places the rarity. Sounds far fetched, but true freedom allows that. Those with enough willpower succeed, and those that don't fail.


You just will never get it will you?!?!? That also is "Discrimination". It doesn't matter if you switch places between them. This is so simple I'm not even going to explain it, yet again.

It's still a double standard. That's what you people don't understand, or simply refuse to understand. Just because you switch it around and say "Well, let's just make it legal for Gay's to refuse Straight people, or Let's just let Blacks repress White folks, or whatever the case may be." Doesn't make your argument valid!!! How can you not understand that????



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Racial segregation LAWS!

are you really this dense?




top topics



 
49
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join