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: 9
49
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Ramcheck
 


If we drew a line separating the north from the south and labelled all the really nice people in the south who aren't what you describe then they would be as unfairyly labelled ass you are
(sp left in)
edit on 17-2-2014 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

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

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




posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


It's just disgusting and so unnecessary....not just a step back a giant leap back into the dark ages. I feel for Kansas gay community and do hope it is tested in court asap.

Solidarity guys.



Ro



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:47 AM
link   
also drawing a line through the middle of the US splits Kansas in half too
www.infoplease.com...
Well, you were right about one thing:
bigotry is not the answer

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



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by alienreality
 



WP4YT
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?



alienreality
What defines humans as separate from the animal kingdom, is a human's ability to know right from wrong, that is what makes us the deciders of right and wrong, is knowing it, it being right or wrong..


Great, my head just exploded, now there are squidgy bits of brain matter and little skull fragments all over the place. This is going to be hell to clean up...

reply to post by slednecktx
 



slednecktx
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"


Just a simple misinterpretation...




posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 02:53 AM
link   

RamcheckApologies to the 'south' in that case, I didn't realise Kansas was so central.


Nope, too late my friend. You already jumped the gun, and labeled an entire people. Don't try to backtrack now!


I don't think the old stereotypes are all that much different to what I see and read on a daily basis though.


Oh ok then, so you form your assumptions from everything that you read? So the media molds your beliefs? That is very sad. You certainly don't see anything, cause you don't even know the geography of the USA.


There are clearly issues which need addressing. I don't understand why you don't just split the country into two or maybe three


Luckily for us, what you don't understand, which seems to be quite a lot, has no merit, nor any impact on what we do over here whatsoever.


It seems the most logical thing to do.


Logic got tossed out the window when you decided to cast judgement on a population that does not even exist in the South. Kansas is middle America, So next time you might consider educating yourself beforehand.

Have you ever even been to any of the Southern U.S states? Kind of ignorant to throw so many good people under the bus when you don't even know who is who, or where is where.


Political opinion is sometimes wrong, and inherently it seems to be wrong most of the time in the south and mid-west regions.


Yep, especially when you don't even know what the hell you're talking about, or who the hell you're talking about, or painting with your race baiting brush for that matter. Anyway, Hope that helps.
~$heopleNation



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:02 AM
link   
Crazy as it sounds I am not really surprised just disappointed I have been monitoring attempts backwards pull at rolling back civil rights and education for quite sometime now,first was/is the attempt at voter suppression,while on the education side it is monkey trial all over again and a push to teach creationism along side evolution, the history books on the United States if the Texas school board had it's way would edit out all history not flattering to the development of the United States,including slavery and the founding fathers,

I fear a beginning of an American anti-intellectualism which will lead to an American dark-age is a foot.. no one really reads and think anymore how else do one explain the FOX NEWS crowd? and sorry not to offend anyone but taking evolution out of school and replacing lt with creationism? you have public leaders and commentators who are not embarrassed by their ignorance...the world was created 6kyrs ago man and dinosaurs walk the earth together,the founding fathers intended America to be a "christian nation"..never heard of separation of church and state, and that a lot of them were Deist.

Not even the Bible that they pretend to hold so dare is beyond their reproach.

www.alternet.org...



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:11 AM
link   
On a more serious note, and to throw in my perspective, while I'm sure most would consider me a leftist hippy granola eater type, I agree with most of what WP4YT (I seriously hope that doesn't stand for "White Power for Whitey") has said in this thread, in that in a truly free society, if you own a private business, you should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason at any time. I think that should be your freedom as a business owner. The hope is that, as a business owner, you'll quickly find that by excluding particular demographics, your business will see less and less revenue as the result of your discrimination, which will in turn either force said business out, or will incentivize the owner to rethink their discriminatory ways. However, I also agree with the point that Cuervo made on the first page-


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. Therefore they do not have the right to exclude certain demographics if the public says they can't. This is why segregation ended. That's called prejudice.

If you want to run a business with only rich white straight guys allowed, buy an island. But if you are playing in our yard (the US), you play by our rules. Many of our rules are against discrimination. It's perfectly reasonable.


So, if this restaurant owner wants to discriminate against gays, what happens when his restaurant catches on fire and the gay firemen (stay with me here) show up to put out the fire, then realize, hey, this is the guy who refuses service to gays! Let's refuse service to him? Would that be acceptable? Not in my mind, because they are public servants, they are not allowed to discriminate in the same that he (a private business owner) is allowed to. They must serve him. Therefore, the only fair way to allow a private business owner to refuse service to the public, is if we also refuse to allow them to use public services and pay for their own fire and police men, their own private road access, and so forth.

If such a policy were instated, I imagine we'd very quickly see these type of business owners carefully rethinking about who they choose to serve.

As an aside, I'd like to point out how proud I am of making it through the entire gay firemen restaurant inferno scenario without once using the word "flaming".



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:30 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Am I reading a different Bill?

"a)" states that a business can refuse to supply the services listed "if related to, or relate to the celebration of".

As I read it, all that means is that I cant refuse to serve you because you're gay, but you cant accuse me of discrimination if I refuse to let you use my venue for your gay wedding, or provide services for said celebration in the grounds that I disagree with homosexuality. (I use "I" for illustrative purposes, I an neither anti or pro gay, just not really bothered either way)

"b)" seems fairly self explanatory, but fail to see hoe "c)" can be enforced. If you are legally "Mr and Mr Smith" how can anyone say you are not?



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 03:36 AM
link   

ExquisitExamplE
On a more serious note, and to throw in my perspective, while I'm sure most would consider me a leftist hippy granola eater type, I agree with most of what WP4YT (I seriously hope that doesn't stand for "White Power for Whitey") has said in this thread, in that in a truly free society, if you own a private business, you should be able to refuse service to anyone for any reason at any time. I think that should be your freedom as a business owner. The hope is that, as a business owner, you'll quickly find that by excluding particular demographics, your business will see less and less revenue as the result of your discrimination, which will in turn either force said business out, or will incentivize the owner to rethink their discriminatory ways. However, I also agree with the point that Cuervo made on the first page-


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. Therefore they do not have the right to exclude certain demographics if the public says they can't. This is why segregation ended. That's called prejudice.

If you want to run a business with only rich white straight guys allowed, buy an island. But if you are playing in our yard (the US), you play by our rules. Many of our rules are against discrimination. It's perfectly reasonable.


So, if this restaurant owner wants to discriminate against gays, what happens when his restaurant catches on fire and the gay firemen (stay with me here) show up to put out the fire, then realize, hey, this is the guy who refuses service to gays! Let's refuse service to him? Would that be acceptable? Not in my mind, because they are public servants, they are not allowed to discriminate in the same that he (a private business owner) is allowed to. They must serve him. Therefore, the only fair way to allow a private business owner to refuse service to the public, is if we also refuse to allow them to use public services and pay for their own fire and police men, their own private road access, and so forth.

If such a policy were instated, I imagine we'd very quickly see these type of business owners carefully rethinking about who they choose to serve.

As an aside, I'd like to point out how proud I am of making it through the entire gay firemen restaurant inferno scenario without once using the word "flaming".

The problem is this extends beyond small private businesses,government employees can discriminate if it's against their so called religious principles.


Any government employee is given explicit permission to discriminate against gay couples—not just county clerks and DMV employees, but literally anyone who works for the state of Kansas. If a gay couple calls the police, an officer may refuse to help them if interacting with a gay couple violates his religious principles. State hospitals can turn away gay couples at the door and deny them treatment with impunity. Gay couples can be banned from public parks, public pools, anything that operates under the aegis of the Kansas state government.

www.slate.com...
edit on 17-2-2014 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:09 AM
link   

amazing
Those supporting this law...why is it okay to be a bigot? Why is it okay to refuse service for someone because of sexual preference? Why is sexual preference wrong to you? Is this based on the bible?


Switch the question around and you get:

Why should a private business be forced to provide goods and/or services to anyone whether they want to or not, for any reason.

And the bill isn't proposing that you can refuse to serve someone due to there sexual preference. If someone walks into your business with a "gay and proud" t-shirt and orders a muffin, this bill does not give you the right to refuse them service. However, if they try and book your venue for their gay engagement, wedding or anniversary party, then you can refuse, as you always have been able to, except now, instead of pretending you had a double booking, or your full, you can honestly say that "as a [insert intolerant religion or political ideologies here] you don't accept gay marriage and will not be providing the requested services", without worrying that you will then end up in court.

Now personally, when such establishments as these start to be honest about their reasons for refusal, even as a straight man, I will avoid them. They will lose business not just from the gay market, but from the straight tolerant market.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 



Doesn't this go against the constitution or federal law?
I don't get how the laws work over yonder.
It's so sad and frustrating that during times of economic hardship that bigotry and hatred and every kind of ism go off the scale.
Well done for voting this in you are now as backward as Saudi Arabia.
What's next, women can't leave the house or drive a car?



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Spider879
 


Yes, that's a definite problem. The psychology of a self-proclaimed Christian who would willingly choose to refuse medical or emergency service to a person because of their beliefs or orientation fairly boggles the mind. I'm hopeful that this would only apply to a very small percentage of dispassionate hypocrites, and that the majority of folks, even those still struggling to escape the bonds of their own prejudice, would continue to serve and get along with gays and all other social groups.

I believe that while there is definitely still bigotry and so forth present in America, it exists in much smaller percentages than we are often times led to believe, and that most people are ready and willing to accept people for who and what they are.

I present this excellent little clip from The Colbert Report in which they visit a small town that, while not geographically part of "The South", is very representative of Southern culture and demographic. I'm sure many people would refer to the people in this video as hicks or hillbillies, but their attitudes are just as forward-thinking and socially inclusive as many cities here in Southern California, perhaps even more so.

Check out this segment, it's fairly short and will certainly make you laugh and think-

People Who Are Destroying America: Johnny Cummings



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Seems to me you guys misread the bill and applying it to all kinds of stuff its very specific.See Kansas banned gay marriage its illegal in the state however there are states around it that allow gay marriage. This bill appears to be trying to protect Kansas businesses from lawsuits if say a gay couple wanted to have invitations made or maybe a priest refused to marry a couple.Lrgally the business would have to abide by the other states law and provide the service. This way they can refuse to provide service to the wedding.In no way does it give the owners the right not to serve gay people or ban them from their business.Its simply Kansas saying they dont believe in same sex marriage and it will not be supported in any way.Now i dont think its right but it is their choice just because one state allows same sex marriage does mean all states have to recognize it. The funny part is they will get recognition from the federal government i see that as causing some unusual situations.
edit on 2/17/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 06:00 AM
link   
I think the law is stupid in that, it shouldn't be needed. A business owner should be able to server whomever they want for whatever reason. Same as an employer should be able to hire only the people that want...for whatever reason. It is their business to run as they wish. If they don't want to serve shrimp from Japan, they shouldn't have to either or...if you don't want to rent that extra room to some "just because you get a bad feeling about the guy"...you shouldn't have to.

BUT!!!! They are idiots as business owners to NOT serve anyone who wishes to pay them.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ExquisitExamplE
 


Thanks for sharing, the clip of that small town put the powers that be in Kansas to shame,this remind me of another Colbert clip of a small town who banded together and refused big money and negative campaigning style of the Koch Brothers who tried to take over their little town from folks in both parties.


edit on 17-2-2014 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


Unfortunately, SOME in the Kansas legislature, and the Governor, are pushers of the "New Apostolic Reformation" agenda...
Brownback is a mucky-muck in that twisted crowd.

Being a citizen of this state, I will be writing my congressmen AGAIN - because...for obvious reasons.

Some people may not be aware of the demographics of Kansas. Northeast Kansas is quite different from the rural areas...the most populated counties are adjacent to Kansas City - and are much less bigoted.

I hate this kind of story. Then again, I only live here because it's where my family is.
I bailed back in the 80s and went to live in Summit County Colorado - Ski Country USA - for 4 winters. Wish we'd stayed there, or gone on (I was interested in Portland OR, Carson City NV, Flagstaff AZ, and Redding CA -- or even Boulder), but my fiance had flunked out of college and had to return to the same school in order to not start "all over". So, here we returned.

Here we married and had two kids. Our mothers are both here, and some siblings. The ties that bind, ya know.

Like someone else said, I doubt it will hold up. There's another fight going on right now to allow big box and grocery stores to sell "hard liquor and strong beer" (currently only private 'liquor stores' are allowed to sell retail - and it hasn't been that long since they relaxed the Sunday-dry-state laws. Now we can buy beer/liquor after NOON on Sundays, but never on Christmas, Easter, and Thanksgiving. Not even the 'small beer' that they do allow to be sold in grocers and convenience stores.

Stupid. It just costs them money, because people simply drive across the state line (5 minutes away), to overcome that archaic nonsense.
Taxes are higher here, too....

Sorry to deflect the topic - but we have constant 'battles' going on between the "Religious Right" and the "Normal People."

It takes a while, but things are cranking along ever so slowly here....
Used to be that EVERYTHING was shut on Sunday (Blue Laws). Also, we could drink at 18, but only in taverns (which didn't serve anything stronger), and to get stronger drinks, one had to be 21 AND belong to a "private club" (a holdover from the "key club" days of yore) that had membership fees. That was relaxed about 30 years ago.

sigh.

edit on 2/17/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 06:56 AM
link   

yamammasamonkey
reply to post by Ramcheck
 


1) Kansas is not in the south. 2) racial discrimination and continued segregation is much more prevelant in the north than in the south.



You are absolutely right. But..... I wouldn't be advertising it, we Southerners don't particularily care for these types (northerners) what with their rage, debacherous, queer/lesbian ways. They can keep their frantic rude obnoxious attitudes out of our states and just keep calling us hillbilly redneck and all the other derogatory terms. The South is probably the most welcoming place in the US, so you northerners can stay north of I 40 and all will be fine.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Plotus
 


What a fascinating and contradictory post. Unpleasant as well.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:05 AM
link   
the law says we have to tolerate homesexuals, that doesn't mean we have to like them



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


Yea it's this funny thing called freedom! What gives you the right to be gay give others the right to be antigay...

It's kinda cool this freedom thing you should try it.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join