And The Brown Shirts March On....

[Psychic Missile]

they claim to be a religious organization (Christian Identity Movement) that believes in the separation of races and the superiority of the white race. So, yes they are. More so than LGBT which are not covered under the US constitution, but only the city fairness ordinance.

I just took a look at the KKK's website and in their FAQ they state:

"The Knights is not, however, a religious organization. The Knights is a political organization who seeks to one day place Christian men and women into seats of public office."

[seer]

I just took a look at the KKK's website and in their FAQ they state:

"The Knights is not, however, a religious organization. The Knights is a political organization who seeks to one day place Christian men and women into seats of public office."

The Christian Identity Movement is.

[Sparko]

I just took a look at the KKK's website and in their FAQ they state:

"The Knights is not, however, a religious organization. The Knights is a political organization who seeks to one day place Christian men and women into seats of public office."

"We don't hate people because of their race. We are a Christian organization," Frank Ancona, the imperial wizard of the Traditional American Knights of the KKK, told NBC 12, distancing himself from the Klan's violent history, asserting that he is seeking to "set the record straight." http://www.christianpost.com/news/kk...-group-116614/

also you conveniently left out the previous sentence in the faq:

A. We require for our members to profess a belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. We do not require that a person belong to any particular denomination.

Sounds religious to me.

[mossrose]

When it comes to human-rights legislation it has an impact.

Yes, but it doesn't make it right. I am sure that those, particularly in the south, who thought slavery was okay were in the majority. And that those in Germany who thought it was a good idea to eradicate the Jews were also in the majority. Both were horribly wrong.

Perhaps the rights of special interests groups have been trampled on. Don't you care? If the “religious rights and freedoms” are “ALWAYS" trumped then perhaps this indicates that the religious groups were demanding their "rights and freedoms" at the expense of the rights and freedoms of others.

If the freedoms are truly being trampled on, then yes. But in this instance, it is no different than a restaurant refusing to serve a customer who has no shoes or shirt. I am sure there are many other printers who would have been pleased to take the money of this special interest group without a qualm.

But for someone to refuse to serve someone in their business because their faith disagrees with the mindset and lifestyle of the person DEMANDING service is not trampling on the rights of that person. It IS trampling on the religious rights of the vendor for that person and whatever civil rights groups get involved to force the vendor to go against their faith.

Indeed! There have been many advances. Equal Civil Rights for all citizens is now almost universal - from blacks to women and now homosexuals.

In Canada, same gender oriented people had the same rights as everyone else. According to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms they already HAD those rights, including those benefits extended to heterosexual married or common-law couples.

But they felt the need to force acceptance upon the public by lobbying and pushing for marriage. They are so desperate for their lifestyle to be accepted and justified that they think any refusal by anyone to do so is the highest of slights. They don't care about the rights and freedoms of anyone else, neither do liberal governments or liberal minded citizens who have been brainwashed into accepting whatever is shoved into their faces by special interest groups.

And a gay pride parade is literally that.

[Psychic Missile]

The Christian Identity Movement is.

Fair enough.

[Psychic Missile]

"We don't hate people because of their race. We are a Christian organization," Frank Ancona, the imperial wizard of the Traditional American Knights of the KKK, told NBC 12, distancing himself from the Klan's violent history, asserting that he is seeking to "set the record straight." http://www.christianpost.com/news/kk...-group-116614/

also you conveniently left out the previous sentence in the faq:

A. We require for our members to profess a belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. We do not require that a person belong to any particular denomination.

Sounds religious to me.

I did make an error. The particular website I referred to is owned and operated by the Imperial Klans of America, which is not the largest offshoot of the KKK, of which a traditional organization no longer exists. It is my understanding that the KKK is a religious organization, not a religion. I don't want to get into nit picking. Seer brought up the CIM which fits the example fine.

[Sparko]

I did make an error. The particular website I referred to is owned and operated by the Imperial Klans of America, which is not the largest offshoot of the KKK, of which a traditional organization no longer exists. It is my understanding that the KKK is a religious organization, not a religion. I don't want to get into nit picking. Seer brought up the CIM which fits the example fine.

OK

[fm93]

The Lexington Pride festival is a gay pride festival (I live only 75 miles from there) http://www.lexpridefest.org/site/?page_id=2

So if the KKK wanted to force a black-owned business to print "White Pride Festival" shirts, you would support that?

Well, a key difference here is that the phrase "White Pride," when used by a group like the KKK, is clearly racist and has connotations of oppressing black people. So no, I wouldn't want black people to do that. But gay pride festivals don't have connotations of oppressing straight people or Christians.

[lilpixieofterror]

Well, a key difference here is that the phrase "White Pride," when used by a group like the KKK, is clearly racist and has connotations of oppressing black people. So no, I wouldn't want black people to do that. But gay pride festivals don't have connotations of oppressing straight people or Christians.

So the bottom line is that only if they agree with his majesty's royal decrees, are they considered a 'protected class'.

[robrecht]

I wonder if we could encourage that . . .

You would like to encourage the KKK to try to force a black-owned print shop to print up racist t-shirts? Seriously?

[fm93]

So the bottom line is that only if they agree with his majesty's royal decrees, are they considered a 'protected class'.

Please don't bother posting anything if you won't bother to represent me correctly. Thank you.

[Jedidiah]

You would like to encourage the KKK to try to force a black-owned print shop to print up racist t-shirts? Seriously?

Think what fun that might be in the courts.

[Tassman]

the "place of public accommodation" would be the VENDOR not the client, dipwad. And as a religious group it has the protection of the constitution no matter how hateful its message is. In fact, they had a march in a town where my brother was a police officer and he and his fellow officers, white and black, were required to protect them from the crowds as they marched and made hate speech.

Only within specific limits: "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 in 1878.

Again, stick to your own country and stop trying to tell us how ours works.

Concern for human rights justice transcends national boundaries especially re the USA, given that what happens there often impacts upon the rest of the world.

[Tassman]

Yes, but it doesn't make it right. I am sure that those, particularly in the south, who thought slavery was okay were in the majority. And that those in Germany who thought it was a good idea to eradicate the Jews were also in the majority. Both were horribly wrong.

In a multicultural, morally diverse nation like the USA, what is “right” is what is deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court.

If the freedoms are truly being trampled on, then yes. But in this instance, it is no different than a restaurant refusing to serve a customer who has no shoes or shirt. I am sure there are many other printers who would have been pleased to take the money of this special interest group without a qualm.

But for someone to refuse to serve someone in their business because their faith disagrees with the mindset and lifestyle of the person DEMANDING service is not trampling on the rights of that person. It IS trampling on the religious rights of the vendor for that person and whatever civil rights groups get involved to force the vendor to go against their faith.

That’s no different than arguing that forcing racists to serve blacks is trampling upon their rights. A racist's world-view is also often intertwined with deep-seated religious beliefs, e.g. the biblical notion that slaves should accept their place and behave well toward their masters. Or the “mark of Cain” argument etc. The bottom line is that in a secular society NO world-view or belief system can be allowed to interfere with the full and equal rights of any citizen.

In Canada, same gender oriented people had the same rights as everyone else. According to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms they already HAD those rights, including those benefits extended to heterosexual married or common-law couples.

Maybe! But that still doesn't equate to full civil rights and smacks a little of the condescending: “near enough is good enough for that lot”.

But they felt the need to force acceptance upon the public by lobbying and pushing for marriage. They are so desperate for their lifestyle to be accepted and justified that they think any refusal by anyone to do so is the highest of slights. They don't care about the rights and freedoms of anyone else, neither do liberal governments or liberal minded citizens who have been brainwashed into accepting whatever is shoved into their faces by special interest groups.

The "special interest group" continually disputing the consistent rulings of the courts regarding homosexual rights appears to be Evangelical Christians, NOT those who have been discriminated against. The latter is just a case of blaming the victim. Furthermore, to rail against the courts and “brainwashed” liberal governments is merely refusing to accept the legitimate judgements of the legal system, which was designed to ensure justice for all.

And a gay pride parade is literally that.

I agree that the gay-pride parades are excessive, just as the feminist bra-burning demonstrations of the 60’s were excessive OR the demonstrations and the March on Washington for black rights. But, the causes were just. It seems that to be noticed at all – i.e. be effective – civil-rights demonstrations need to be a bit OTT.

[seer]

Well, a key difference here is that the phrase "White Pride," when used by a group like the KKK, is clearly racist and has connotations of oppressing black people. So no, I wouldn't want black people to do that. But gay pride festivals don't have connotations of oppressing straight people or Christians.

Nonsense, speech is speech. So you would allow discrimination in one case but not another.