Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Fighting Back!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Interesting you should come to the "bigot" angle, when all I was referring to was being passed over for promotion because I wasn't a minority.
    You were comparing anti-discrimination laws directly with affirmative action laws. I personally had to change careers when I graduated right into the teeth of the affirmative action quota system. But I wasn't turned down for every job out of bigotry - those who interviewed me wanted to hire me, but they had legal quotas. No law required the Giffords to perform x% of same-sex marriages. Only to provide the same services to all.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by phank View Post
      You were comparing anti-discrimination laws directly with affirmative action laws.
      No, not directly. YOU made that leap.

      I personally had to change careers when I graduated right into the teeth of the affirmative action quota system. But I wasn't turned down for every job out of bigotry - those who interviewed me wanted to hire me, but they had legal quotas.
      Wrong - they were NOT "legal quotas", as ruled by subsequent court action, resulting in back pay and restitution for those wrongly discriminated against.
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by phank View Post
        Why, by golly, the Giffords offered "separate but equal" accommodations, and that should have been plenty good enough. No, this couple was not accorded the same treatment as others, as required by law, but the Giffords' faith obliges them to be bigots, and therefore we are all required to favor them and not their victims. We are expected to RESPECT bigotry, because they wave bibles around and claim Jesus WANTS them to be bigots. It must say that somewhere in the bible...doesn't it?

        Up until now, we've had a nice and polite discussion. But now you feel the need to wade in here with your disrespectful attitude and mock others for their personal beliefs. Congratulations on acting like a 5-year old. I probably shouldn't dignify your post with a response, but I'll be brief.

        I didn't say anything about 'separate but equal'. You entirely missed the point I was making. And since you don't seem to have the slightest idea about how I view this situation, perhaps I should clarify. Ultimately, I don't care what the law says -- if the law compels Christians to commit sin or support sin, then that law is morally wrong. Period.

        This is why I mentioned earlier that I didn't want to repeat the debates that have already happened here. Because I'm not trying to argue from the standpoint of the law (in this thread). I'm talking about right vs. wrong.

        If you want to have a polite discussion, phank, I'll be happy to continue with this. But if you want to continue acting as you have so far, then I'll also be happy to ignore you.
        "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          From the link you provided:
          Generally, places of public accommodation are businesses or buildings that are open or offer services to the general public. These facilities can be publicly or privately owned and operated.

          Do you REALLY think Obama, Holder, or their ilk would say that a Church could NOT fall within those guidelines?
          Yes, I really do think that. This is a fallacious slippery-slope argument and militates against the US Constitution as practised: "Freedom of religion means freedom to hold an opinion or belief, but not to take action in violation of social duties or subversive to good order," Chief Justice Waite wrote in Reynolds v. United States (1878). The U.S. Court found that while laws cannot interfere with religious belief and opinions, laws can be made to regulate some religious practices......The Court stated that to rule otherwise, "would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect permit every citizen to become a law unto himself". Cited Wiki.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_A...se_of_religion

          This is what's happening in the Gifford example.

          Originally posted by myth View Post
          I think it's very telling that you do not believe in freedom of speech. Thanks for being up-front about it.
          Freedom of speech is a right but one cannot hold any personal beliefs, including the professed doctrines of religious belief, superior to the law of the land. See above: "Freedom of religion means freedom to hold an opinion or belief, but not to take action in violation of social duties or subversive to good order.”
          Last edited by Tassman; 10-08-2014, 02:21 AM.
          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by phank View Post
            You were comparing anti-discrimination laws directly with affirmative action laws. I personally had to change careers when I graduated right into the teeth of the affirmative action quota system. But I wasn't turned down for every job out of bigotry - those who interviewed me wanted to hire me, but they had legal quotas. No law required the Giffords to perform x% of same-sex marriages. Only to provide the same services to all.
            Then they would also be compelled to host a KKK event.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
              Let me guess.... You'd also be against anti-abortion protests (the peaceful, non-disruptive ones) too?

              How 'odd' that all the opinions you think should not be allowed to be expressed in public places are the ones that don't coincide with your political views and pet 'social justice' hobbyhorses.
              Off topic!

              The issue is one of equal civil rights, and their implementation, for all citizens; no more no less.

              Also - you do realise that leading figures in the suffrage movement were motivated by their Christian principles; and MLK was 'ahem' - a Christian? Yeah, let's keep those bigoted Christians quiet in public...
              Also - you do realize that the suffragette movement, equal civil rights for homosexuals and blacks have all been opposed by Christians citing biblical texts to make their point. And that the Southern Baptist Convention (the largest Protestant body in the US) was founded primarily in opposition to the abolition of slavery? So "yeah, let's keep those bigoted Christians quiet in public..." if that's the best they can do.

              Originally posted by Kristian Joensen View Post
              Then they would also be compelled to host a KKK event.
              No! The Civil Rights Act specifically prohibits discrimination against segments of the population and discrimination is precisely what the KKK is known for. It is its very raison d'être in fact.
              Last edited by Tassman; 10-08-2014, 03:01 AM.
              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                Off topic!

                The issue is one of equal civil rights, and their implementation, for all citizens; no more no less.



                Also - you do realize that the suffragette movement, equal civil rights for homosexuals and blacks have all been opposed by Christians citing biblical texts to make their point. And that the Southern Baptist Convention (the largest Protestant body in the US) was founded primarily in opposition to the abolition of slavery? So "yeah, let's keep those bigoted Christians quiet in public..." if that's the best they can do.



                No! The Civil Rights Act specifically prohibits discrimination against segments of the population and discrimination is precisely what the KKK is known for. It is its very raison d'être in fact.
                Then Phank was wrong about them having to provide the same services for all.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Kristian Joensen View Post
                  Then Phank was wrong about them having to provide the same services for all.
                  He was right in terms of the federal Civil Rights Act regarding their obligations as "a place of Public Accommodation". The KKK under no circumstances qualifies as "a place of Public Accommodation" as defined by the Act.
                  Last edited by Tassman; 10-08-2014, 05:39 AM.
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                    Freedom of speech is a right but one cannot hold any personal beliefs, including the professed doctrines of religious belief, superior to the law of the land. See above: "Freedom of religion means freedom to hold an opinion or belief, but not to take action in violation of social duties or subversive to good order.”
                    Can and do. That's the whole point. While you believe the law of the land is the ultimate authority, many of us do not.
                    "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by myth View Post
                      Can and do. That's the whole point. While you believe the law of the land is the ultimate authority, many of us do not.
                      Yes, I guess Tass means that the civil rights movement was subversive to good order. You know that Martin Luther King guy using his religious beliefs to change the laws of the land: "I still have a dream. It is deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up, live out the true meaning of its creed: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.
                      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        Yes, I really do think that. This is a fallacious slippery-slope argument and militates against the US Constitution as practised:
                        This assumes that they actually CARE about the Constitution. They have demonstrated that they do not. Their ideology, in their minds, is superior to the rule of law.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                          Off topic!
                          Weaksauce.





                          Originally posted by Tassman
                          The issue is one of equal civil rights, and their implementation, for all citizens; no more no less.

                          Yes, you've already made it quite clear you're not in favour of equal rights.


                          Originally posted by Tassman
                          Also - you do realize that the suffragette movement, equal civil rights for homosexuals and blacks have all been opposed by Christians citing biblical texts to make their point. And that the Southern Baptist Convention (the largest Protestant body in the US) was founded primarily in opposition to the abolition of slavery? So "yeah, let's keep those bigoted Christians quiet in public..." if that's the best they can do.

                          So MLK should have kept his Christian mouth shut, then, and not brought his religious views into the public square. Ditto William Wilberforce and the Clapham group; Harriet Tubman (slavery), Kate Sheppherd (women's suffrage, NZ) and many, many more, too numerous to mention, down to organisations like Sojourners and Rahab Ministries (helping Thai prostitutes find positive alternative ways to financially support themselves and get out of the sex trade). You clearly think all these people - and many more through history - should have just shut up and not inflicted their religious claptrap on society, as they campaigned for freedoms for women and children; established orphanages; built and ran hospitals; fed and clothed the destitute; organised help for addicts and victims; provided education for many who would not have had it.

                          Yep, society would be better off if only rational atheists like Richard 'Child sex abuse is not that bad' Dawkins and Tassman 'shut up you Christians - but I believe in equal rights for all' controlled our social agenda.



                          It's interesting to note that the people that truly believe in equality and free expression are the ones who built societies where it is even possible for groups they disagree with - like gay activists - to publicly campaign and push for social change, and succeed at it. And those activists, and their ilk, are the ones who want everyone who disagrees with them to be forcibly kept quiet, to have the law force their compliance with and assent to, the activist's view of the world. The ones who believe in freedom of speech and belief are willing to live and let live, willing to allow others to hold and publicly express differing opinions, willing to agree on social change where they see there has been real injustice, willing to fight for a society where such change is even possible, willing to spend their lives working for change, and helping the weakest and the poorest. Those are the people Tassman wants to shut up, by force of law if need be. Equal rights and freedom of speech for everyone who agrees with Tassman!!
                          ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
                            It's interesting to note that the people that truly believe in equality and free expression are the ones who built societies where it is even possible for groups they disagree with - like gay activists - to publicly campaign and push for social change, and succeed at it. And those activists, and their ilk, are the ones who want everyone who disagrees with them to be forcibly kept quiet, to have the law force their compliance with and assent to, the activist's view of the world.
                            Exactly!
                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by myth View Post
                              Crazy stuff is already happening. So, it’s legal to stand in the street and make one statement. But to any man who stands on the same street and expresses his opinion that the opposite is true….well, don’t be surprised if you’re arrested. Freedom of speech and religion are alive and well in the UK, I see.


                              http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...-is-a-sin.html

                              http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes...ity-a-sin.html
                              wow, the UK has really gone off the deep end. So it is against the law to upset someone with your words? That's ridiculous. What's next? Witch burning for giving someone the Evil Eye?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
                                It's interesting to note that the people that truly believe in equality and free expression are the ones who built societies where it is even possible for groups they disagree with - like gay activists - to publicly campaign and push for social change, and succeed at it. And those activists, and their ilk, are the ones who want everyone who disagrees with them to be forcibly kept quiet, to have the law force their compliance with and assent to, the activist's view of the world. The ones who believe in freedom of speech and belief are willing to live and let live, willing to allow others to hold and publicly express differing opinions, willing to agree on social change where they see there has been real injustice, willing to fight for a society where such change is even possible, willing to spend their lives working for change, and helping the weakest and the poorest. Those are the people Tassman wants to shut up, by force of law if need be. Equal rights and freedom of speech for everyone who agrees with Tassman!!
                                Yes, those people who push so hard for acceptance are so often the ones who become the oppressors. It appears they favor free speech as long as you agree with THEM.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Cow Poke, Today, 07:29 AM
                                10 responses
                                34 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by firstfloor, Today, 03:49 AM
                                36 responses
                                167 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Thoughtful Monk, Yesterday, 01:18 PM
                                3 responses
                                26 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                                Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 10:44 AM
                                2 responses
                                49 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by NorrinRadd, Yesterday, 01:15 AM
                                13 responses
                                107 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post NorrinRadd  
                                Working...
                                X