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.
For the singer, it is a moral issue, she wrote. "I only know I could never 'throw roses to Hitler.' And I certainly could never sing for him."
Chamberlin, who said she has been with the choir for five years, did not respond to interview requests and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints declined to comment on her status in the famed group or on how many others might have dropped out or complained.
originally posted by: SprocketUK
I can't imagine a pro life church choir being happy about singing for a pro abortion governor for example and they oughtnt to be forced to perform.
in other words, his political beliefs.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
The difference is, the entertainers aren't discriminating against Trump because of his race, nationality or his sexual orientation. They are refusing to deal with him because of his actions and comments.
The left doesn't have a problem with a baker or pizza maker turning away someone who comes in with obnoxious, unruly and disruptive behavior. That is a perfectly legitimate reason to refuse service to someone.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: kaylaluv
They did not refuse to serve a gay customer, they refused to participate in a gay wedding. Had a gay person come in to buy a cake for a straight wedding there is no indication they would have been refused.
Both Trump and the gay wedding are examples of refusal due to moral beliefs. The left has simply decided they are the ones to decide morality, and you must adhere to their moral beliefs.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
A gay person has the right to public accommodations, which means they have the right to buy a cake for their event, no matter what the event is.
If a gay person came in screaming and shouting obscenities and physical threats, the baker would have every right to kick them out.
Trump is not being refused because he is a straight white male. He is not being refused because he is wanting services for a specific event. He is being refused because of the horrible things he says.
I just wish the left would extend the same courtesy to those operating from a religious motivation.
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: kaylaluv
They did not refuse to serve a gay customer, they refused to participate in a gay wedding. Had a gay person come in to buy a cake for a straight wedding there is no indication they would have been refused.
Both Trump and the gay wedding are examples of refusal due to moral beliefs. The left has simply decided they are the ones to decide morality, and you must adhere to their moral beliefs.
The difference is that refusing to sing at Trump's inauguration is an act of political free speech. That is constitutionally protected.
As a place of public accommodation, refusing to provide a service or goods to a paying customer because of their age, sex, religion, sexual preference, etc, is not protected.
originally posted by: twfau
The right to be free from discrimination is, for many, an important right. At the moment we value the rights of the individual over the rights of companies/organisations. Therefore, the rights of the individuals not to be discriminated is a more important issue than the rights of a religious organisation to pick and choose which morals of their Holy Book to live by.
Perhaps a company should have the right to serve whom they choose, but they should also be aware that they are part of a country that values treating people equally.
On the Trump issue, the singer has every right to resign from the performance as she would be exercising her right to freedom, thought, and religion. I fail to see how she would be discriminating Trump by doing this but maybe you can enlighten me.