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.

 

The hypocrisy of those against the proposed AZ law (regarding gays)

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Zoning Laws can be used to resolve this issue ...

1] Is the business ...

a) a Private Business [legally obligated to conform to any light zoning restrictions for residential, industrial and commercial [including financial banking models]]?

Note: These businesses can serve whoever the hell they want to by discriminating ok!

b) a Public Business [legally obligated to conform to any medium or heavy zoning restrictions for residential, industrial and commercial [including financial banking models]]?

Note: These businesses must serve EVERYBODY without discrimination or the lose the right to be a public business and this limits the size and scope of their business.

c) a Church [legally obligated to conform to Tax Free zoning restrictions]?

Note: A Church serves its flock and that is determined by the priest overseeing the church and the doctrins/dogma of that church. The Government determines if a Church meets the requirements to earn the Tax Free priviledge.

d) a Local, State or Federal Government Department Business [legally obligated to conform to the constitution!]?

Note: These Government Businesses conform to the zoning rules for Public Businesses but with an extra level of oversight due to using PUBLIC (i.e. TAX) funds.

AKA We The People [THE PUBLIC] control the Governments (by voting for and contacting our local, stated and federal representatives)!

Everybody can get what they want, but they may be limited by the zoning laws.

So discriminate all you want ... but don't expect to own much land, command much market share, control much cash and or product flows because private business is zoned to be small for very good reasons which involve not disrupting society at large with individuals personal greed or business problems.

Just my quickly deflating (due to inflation) 2c worth of IMO ok.

BTW! Whatever happened to Public Decency ... you know ... caring about each other AS IF WE WERE EQUALS???

A Society Divided Can NOT Stand!




posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 


Opinion is fine. Action is another. You can't open your business to the public and then decide who the public is.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Kali74
reply to post by benrl
 


Opinion is fine. Action is another. You can't open your business to the public and then decide who the public is.


Tell the IRS that Kali.

Only certain kinds get their 'service'.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Nothing to do with the topic. But let's indulge... IRS targeting would be wrong.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Kali74
reply to post by neo96
 


Nothing to do with the topic. But let's indulge... IRS targeting would be wrong.


Has everything to do with the topic.

Discrimination is Discrimination, and that happens every day in this country.

But people are only 'outraged' when it comes to LGBT's.

And we agree it is wrong.

Just like it's wrong to make laws that target gun owners,smokers, rich people,bankers,corporations, and Christians to name a few.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


You forgot obese people.

It's okay to hate the fatty-fats as well.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:03 PM
link   

beezzer
reply to post by neo96
 


You forgot obese people.

It's okay to hate the fatty-fats as well.


Whoops sorry I forgot.

Where are they all preaching their outrage at that discrimination ?

There is a clear double standard that is on display.

That is usually met with 'crickets' when it comes to those others.

edit on 26-2-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:20 PM
link   


how are they going to say who is and who isn't gay? are they going to ask everyone? are they going to test everyone? that is the "Freedom" you want?
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


I couldn't agree with you more. I find this whole subject absolutely disgusting. That there are people in the world so bigoted, so intolerant....well, it makes me lose any small faith in humanity that I had left.

Perhaps they will do as the Nazis, and enact a law that you have to wear a rainbow band around your arm to signify you are gay....may seem like an extreme example...but one that is totally applicable. It's such a slippery slope. What will be next....Muslims refusing to serve women...Satanists refusing to serve Christians....Hindus refusing to serve Bhuddists....that is just such a step back into the dark ages.

I don't know how many Americans I have talked to that deride Muslims for their intolerance....their fanatical religious beliefs...yet here they are doing their best to emulate them....wanna talk about hypocrisy.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Kali74
reply to post by benrl
 


Opinion is fine. Action is another. You can't open your business to the public and then decide who the public is.


Yea, you actually kind of can.

Its called the right to refuse service, And you see the signs all over.

But your right, there are protected classes, and its ridiculously hard to prove discrimination on that grounds, so yea the laws are all well in good.

But "hidden" discrimination will happen anyway.

Look at Civil rights as a case study of what I am talking about.

We can all agree it was right, but certainly there has been missteps along the way, and if you look at the end results culturally there certainly are some negative results to how it was handled.

Years later and Americans of African descent still face struggles relating to how civil rights was handled. I am not saying LBGT equality is not vital, or that discrimination is not bad, just that

Government is a hammer, and not every problem is a nail, Societal pressure can be more of the scalpel needed over the hammer of government mandate.

Economic and social pressures may work far better than a government penalty.

One way the bigots just hide, the other their shamed into failure.

Im not saying I know the answer, just that it bares looking at and trying to learn from past mistakes, government can over reach, in fact this whole issue starts at governments "allowing" or not "allowing " something in the first place.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 


I will have to agree that is the right of the business owner to set the rules of what their business should or not allow, but under religious bases it kind of brings a big debate.

Privately owned business giving services to the public and having a choice of who they will give those services brings back memories of another era and another time when discrimination due to race was allowed in the nation, for that laws were enacted to make sure that everybody was treated the same regardless of skin color.

Now how can this apply when it comes to gender preferences, under religious veiws, is many factors here than just skin color.

And that is something that needs to be debated, when it comes to the rights of business owner and the rights of the people not to be discriminated.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:29 PM
link   

marg6043
reply to post by doubletap
 


Now how can this apply when it comes to gender preferences, under religious veiws, is many factors here than just skin color.

And that is something that needs to be debated, when it comes to the rights of business owner and the rights of the people not to be discriminated.



Yes, Open debate on this matter needs to happen, far to often its stifled by both sides.

If your willing to discuss one will label you Homophobic, the Other an Anti Jesus Liberal.

It needs to be debated freely and openly, least we make the errors of Civil Rights and it takes a few 100 years to sort it all...



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:35 PM
link   

deadcalm


I couldn't agree with you more. I find this whole subject absolutely disgusting. That there are people in the world so bigoted, so intolerant....well, it makes me lose any small faith in humanity that I had left.

Perhaps they will do as the Nazis, and enact a law that you have to wear a rainbow band around your arm to signify you are gay....may seem like an extreme example...but one that is totally applicable. It's such a slippery slope. What will be next....Muslims refusing to serve women...Satanists refusing to serve Christians....Hindus refusing to serve Bhuddists....that is just such a step back into the dark ages.

I don't know how many Americans I have talked to that deride Muslims for their intolerance....their fanatical religious beliefs...yet here they are doing their best to emulate them....wanna talk about hypocrisy.


Having a different opinion than you do doesnt make people "intolerant". That word is right below racist in terms of overused ridiculousness.

Where is your tolerance for their opinions?



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:36 PM
link   

ZonedOut


BTW! Whatever happened to Public Decency ... you know ... caring about each other AS IF WE WERE EQUALS???

A Society Divided Can NOT Stand!


Appropriate user name lol,


In my opinion this entire debate is farce.

The fact that we try and sit here and argue what the government "allows" a free individual to do, business, Marry, Love, ingest, etc, When it harms no one else physically. IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE ARGUING ABOUT.

Not what they allow or don't, that they have the balls to call this the land of the free, While we all sit divide on and fighting over who the government allows those rights too...

Its all a bit absurd.

Its to keep us separate, we are powerful untied.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:36 PM
link   
I'll say this again. This law is not about gays. It's about protecting people from being compelled to violate their faith.

Leaving aside the issue of whether or not homosexuality is a sin (the act itself since you can argue about the validity of the Paul and say that Christ said nothing about it), the act of marriage to a believing Christian is pretty clearly one between one man and one woman. God states this in the OT and Christ reiterates it in the NT. This means that for the faithful, marriage is not only a sacred thing, but pretty clearly and explicitly only a state God blesses between a man and a woman. Anything else is sacrilegious and sinful and potentially a mockery of one of the more sacred things in Christian faith.

Now, I understand full well that not everyone believes this way, not even all Christians do. That doesn't change the fact that there are those of who do. I know how much my own marriage means to me and how sacred a thing it is. This was brought home to me when a friend got involved with a married woman against our advice and allowed himself to be used to provide an excuse for her to break her marriage. He excused it by saying that she regarded her marriage as just a trial thing anyhow.

The depth of disgust I felt ... I have a hard time describing. I didn't know until then just how deeply sacred marriage is to me. It was a long time until I could even speak to that person again because if he regarded one marriage that lightly, how did he regard others, including my own?

So, to get back to the discussion, when you ask someone who believes to participate in a "gay marriage," you're asking them to knowingly participate in something that is for them sinful. I know you don't think it is, but for them, they are sinning to participate and to glorify this ceremony. It's deeply offensive for them to do and even worse for them to be forced to do.

The best thing here for all involved would be for simple respect. Leave each other alone. You do what you're going to do, and let them alone. If one baker won't bake your wedding cake, there will be plenty of others who will.
edit on 26-2-2014 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


Do you believe that anyone has a right to shop at/patronize any business they so choose?

If so, do you believe the rights of the potential customer outweigh those of the business owner?

I believe every business owner should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason, including race. If they want to turn away dollars, there are plenty of businesses that would be happy to take those beautiful bucks.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:43 PM
link   

ketsuko
If one baker won't bake your wedding cake, there will be plenty of others who will.
edit on 26-2-2014 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)


Exactly.

Instead of whining, crying, calling news stations, and threatening lawsuits, they couldve just shut up and found another bakery.

Instead, they chose to attempt to force others to comply with their way of thinking.

Who cares if their feelings were hurt? Who cares if they were "offended".

Hurt feelings mean nothing and are a part of life.

I've been refused service because I was white. I didnt cry or throw a fit, I found another business that was happy to take my dollars. Thats the mature and intelligent way to handle things, not whining like a baby and telling everyone how offended you are.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:43 PM
link   

beezzer

The Constitution guarantees a right to bear arms.

Comparing the carrying of a potentially deadly weapon into a business to refusing service to someone who is perceived to be gay is just silly. When entering a business, one generally assumes that the proprietor is providing a safe environment. Bringing a gun into the establishment creates the dangerous conditions that warrants the carrier or at least the weapon being removed. One's sexuality does not create a potentially deadly situation, thus comparing the two is ridiculous.

As a final thought and to hopefully ease some tension:



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:48 PM
link   

jezebel5150
. Bringing a gun into the establishment creates the dangerous conditions that warrants the carrier or at least the weapon being removed.


Uh what?

Bringing a gun into a business does not create a dangerous situation lol.

I'm having a hard time believing that comment was actually serious, so I will pretend to laugh at your little joke there.


har har har....or something.
edit on 26-2-2014 by doubletap because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   


Where is your tolerance for their opinions?
reply to post by doubletap
 


In what way am I hindering anyone from having an opinion? Have I stated that people aren't allowed to have their own opinion?

You take your opinion and do whatever you want with it. I most certainly do not share it....but you are welcome to it.




in·tol·er·ant
inˈtälərənt/Submit
adjective
1.
not tolerant of views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own.


This is all a moot point anyway....the law didn't pass. It would seem sanity prevailed....better luck next time.


Too bad so sad....it didn't pass



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 


And you get it and since you have expressed it, you will be attacked by the Progressives here on ATS.




top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join