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.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ProfessorChaos
They refused to bake any cake.
originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Plz stop watching fox news
I agree with the OP. And despite the moans from the increasingly hypocritical left, bigotry is bigotry regardless.
The script goes : "Love group a, but hate group b for not loving group a"....that's literally the concept stripped down.
"Selective bigotry": Typical leftist nonsense.
And despite the moans from the increasingly hypocritical left..
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
The verdict was yes but the payout was much higher because of the behavior of the bakery owners after the coupe filed the discrimination complaint.
The bureau found the Kleins liable for the threats made by others against the couple and awarded them to pay “$60,000 in damages to Laurel Bowman-Cryer and $75,000 in damages to Rachel Bowman-Cryer for emotional suffering.”
Raw Story
Also this:
From the Final Order:
“This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage. It is about a business’s refusal to serve
someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.
Within Oregon’s public accommodations law is the basic principle of human decency that every
person, regardless of their sexual orientation, has the freedom to fully participate in society. The
ability to enter public places, to shop, to dine, to move about unfettered by bigotry.”
Link
originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: ProfessorChaos
originally posted by: reldra
originally posted by: ProfessorChaos
originally posted by: reldra
No. You are not "intolerant" if you won't accept bigots or bigotry-related concern trolling or apologia about what is truly tolerant and what is not when you meet hate. That ship has sailed."
I hope that the inherent hilarity of stating that being intolerant of behaviors that you do not agree with doesn't make you "intolerant", hasn't escaped the eyes of those reading the post quoted above.
Obvious logical fallacy is obvious.
Because I do not tolerate bigotry does not make me intolerant. I would have to not tolerate for no reason at all and for random things.
Let's say you don't like swearing in your home. You do not tolerate it and you tell people who use an expletive on the spot, that you do not tolerate it. That does not make you intolerant in general.
Not tolerating something makes you intolerant of it. This should not be a difficult concept to grasp.
Yes, of IT. The one thing. Like the example of others using expletives in one;s home.
Following your logic of "being a bigot of a bigot doesn't make you a bigot...it makes you right" is the same as saying "the killer of a killer is not a killer". I just don't see how you don't get this? It literally baffles me.
originally posted by: reldra
I have seen people say things like 'I don't believe in your imaginary sky God, so that doesn't pertain to me'. I have seen Christians say things on the same level of dismissivness. Believe me, if I saw a Christian insulted for no other reason and in a mean way, I would call out the jerk. You don't know me very well. You haven't seen my contributions to serene religious discussions either, it appears. I am not an atheist.
originally posted by: Wardaddy454
originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE
I haven't seen anyone who hates Christians here
Bullocks. I see plenty of people mocking/bullying Christians or anyone of any faith. Maybe you refuse to see it because you agree with those doing the mocking.
It is a sad and backwards time when the defenders of the oppressed are called bigots. This is a twisted concept the right wing has invented. Or maybe it's just right wing media that ahas invented it. I am not sure whom, but they are pandering to a certain segment of the population.
It's like I'm listening to an MSNBC interview of Clinton, Very pathetic that you'd pull the victim card here lol.
I rarely watch the MSM and have not seen an interview of Hilary Clinton in at least 2 years.
Pulling the victim card would mean that I am saying I am a victim.
You are at least confused and assume too much.
originally posted by: Bone75
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: ProfessorChaos
They refused to bake any cake.
That's a lie. The couple were regular costumers of the Kleins. So as Chaos pointed out, they weren't refused service based on their sexual orientation.