FrankT said:

Wrong, Sir, it is a Religion

A Muslim, sometimes spelled Moslem,[1] relates to a person who follows the religion of Islam,[2] a monotheistic Abrahamic religion based on the Quran. Muslims consider the Quran to be the verbatim word of God as revealed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

They might have been Arab or Iraqi Christians but there is nothing such as a Christian Muslim.

Click to expand...

Here ya go frank, should have read the rest of the article:

Muslim is generally used in conversation to qualify or distinguish a person. For instance, ‘Remember the Muslim man who works at the bank?’ It can also be used as a simple description of one’s religious beliefs. For instance: ‘She is Christian but she is Muslim.’ Because Muslims are a minority community in many countries and most of the West, describing someone as Muslim may also reflect on their lifestyle and choice of dress in addition to their religious beliefs.
Misuses of Islam and Muslim

Islam : grammatically speaking, Islam should only refer to the religion or acts done in the name of that religion, never a person who practices that religion. Islamic community and Islamic art are correct, Islamic man is not.
Muslim should be used to describe all people of the Islamic faith but not the faith itself. You may say that you are interested in the religion of Muslims, but never in the Muslim religion.


Read more: Difference Between Islam and Muslim | Difference Between | Islam vs Muslim http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/difference-between-islam-and-muslim/#ixzz3YwD96i4M

MAXman said:

I'm glad her buisness is doing well enough she can turn down customers. I think it's a bs reason, and based off of names? Get serious,
Doc and frank may disagree on the semantics but there's plenty of Christians named Ibrahim, etc.

I also find it funny that the army medic is standing up for the people this women has decided to insult. Actually, I find that a lot of men and women that spent time in those two dung holes actually support the people from that part of the world, and are rather tolerant of it's predominant religion.

But just as I feel frank t(or doc, or ric san, or anybody on here, despite their political lean/veteran status/gender choice/hair color) has the right to say what he feels, this woman has the right to not serve any person regardless of religion.




But let's get serious. If I was a deep cover sleeper agent training for a ground assault, would i really do it in Armpit, Arkansas?

Click to expand...

I defend the good ones, my friends life was saved by a Muslim in Afghanistan. He came to their FOB and let them know a group of over 200 Taliban were going to attack them. Gave them enough time to call in air assets and destroy them before they were obliterated by the Taliban.

Also I saved many Muslim lives while I was in Iraq. People don't have a choice where they are born. Not all of them over there are evil as many on this forum paint them all to be. I also agree there are a lot of evil Muslims. Those are the ones that need to die.

I've noticed there are people here who group certain types of people into a stereotype all the time. Whatever happened to equal rights here. Isn't that what i along with all the other vets here have fought for?

Doc

Also I'm a combat medic, I don't see skin color, I see a patient in need.

So if "All men were created equal" then why was there the 3/5ths compromise, why did Presidents own slaves? I thought all men were created equal? Even some of our founding fathers own slaves.... George Washington. So which is probably why the whole civil rights movement happened from slavery to discrimination to the civil rights movement making sure everyone one was actually equal or treated in that way.

Why the 3/5? Why Slaves? Why the Discrimination? etc etc.

Man, all ethnicities, religions, races or creeds, are broken. Those with power are loathe to give it up. There's no one answer to your question.

Is it right for the government to FORCE you do something you don't believe in, or are against, on your own property if you aren't infringing on someone else's rights? Does someone else have the right to be on YOUR property if you don't want them there? Are you a liberal, conservative, libertarian or other? Is YOUR opinion the "right" one? Use whatever law you want to back up your claim but those laws were written by men with all their flaws and each their own agenda. Those laws can change with a pen stroke (some bigger strokes than others) Use your religion, whichever one you want, to back up your OPINION, but men have a way of interpreting things to their own benefit.

Where do you stand on the bakery that wouldn't cater to the homosexuals? Is it wrong for them to discriminate against them as well?

Personally, I lean highly libertarian. If you're not messing up someone else's day.... go ahead. Hurt feelings do not constitute infringement in my eyes. If you want to hate someone from the protection of your own property fine. If you want to espouse unpopular opinions and thoughts at your place of business, that's fine too. Just don't be surprised if your business fails.

That's easy Brandon: they were politicians. They say one thing, and do another.

Seperate issue, but related:
There's a man that comes to my work, if I had to guess if say Iraqi. He comes with his wife and his two kids. I call them Arabs, defiantly Muslim. He has what is absolutly the scars of a gunshot wound to his forhead.

I don't know the man but every time I see him I smile and thank god he gets to watch his kids grow up. Then I call my wife and tell her I love her and tell my son I love him.

Little Jack's Guns said:

Why the 3/5? Why Slaves? Why the Discrimination? etc etc.

Man, all ethnicities, religions, races or creeds, are broken. Those with power are loathe to give it up. There's no one answer to your question.

Is it right for the government to FORCE you do something you don't believe in, or are against, on your own property if you aren't infringing on someone else's rights? Does someone else have the right to be on YOUR property if you don't want them there? Are you a liberal, conservative, libertarian or other? Is YOUR opinion the "right" one? Use whatever law you want to back up your claim but those laws were written by men with all their flaws and each their own agenda. Those laws can change with a pen stroke (some bigger strokes than others) Use your religion, whichever one you want, to back up your OPINION, but men have a way of interpreting things to their own benefit.

Where do you stand on the bakery that wouldn't cater to the homosexuals? Is it wrong for them to discriminate against them as well?

Personally, I lean highly libertarian. If you're not messing up someone else's day.... go ahead. Hurt feelings do not constitute infringement in my eyes. If you want to hate someone from the protection of your own property fine. If you want to espouse unpopular opinions and thoughts at your place of business, that's fine too. Just don't be surprised if your business fails.

Click to expand...

My view I was trying to protrude was not all men were created equal as our fore fathers stated. Any way you look at it they weren't. If that was the case the 3/5ths compromise should've never happened and the black slaves should've been reprsent them as a whole. I bet all the white slaves were represented as a whole. I know laws can be changed at a pen stroke that is why people stand up and fight for those right ex MLK. But with the whole gay aspect. Just denying them business based of you can tell they are gay then no. If a "gay" walked in wanted a cake and denied the sale what if it wasn't a gay guy maybe a guy that had a very femine voice. To many what ifs anyways if the bakery owner felt wrong making a cake saying they are married or whatever then no. If he is just denying a sale all together and judging them because of that fact then no that shouldn't be right. Just like you shouldn't deny someone because of race or religon. Just my take on it but I guess in my eyes everyone is equal and should be treated as such wether it is rewarding or punishment. But I guess I am the minority on that aspect. But this thread also shows the high stereotypes to. So are you saying the fonding fathers were a little flawed in what they created?So are you stating that in the Declaration of Independence what the fonding fathers stated was flawed? Them stating all MEN are created equal but then truning around and doing the opposite.

I'm not worried about opening a buisness but let me ask this how would a buisness prosper if you deny somone out side of this situation? Granted this situation most people think of Muslims as terroists because of what they are told by other people without doing actual research. Kind of ironic of Muslims make of 23% of the worlds population but all we hear about is the extremists. Kind of like all we hear about is how bad police officers are or how great Christanity (playing devils advocate right now) But as I have pulled versuses it states that we should be put to death for a lot of stuff that in our eyes sound ridiculous but not all Christains follow that just like I highly doubt all Muslims follow what "Islam" states. So back to the OP from what I see most people believe it is okay to deny buisness because of religon then also y'all should't have a problem denying sale to anyone of race, or sex based on just that information itself. No other info.

Brandon_SPC said:

Okay what is everyones take on the equal oppurtunity act? Say you go to a job interview and they turn you around because you are white no other reason. Hell you don't even get to walk into the door. What is y'alls take on that?

Also for everyone that thinks Muslim is so bad lets look at a few versuses from the "Christain" bible.

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

If a man commits adultery with another man's wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

It goes on and on but this isn't true because it is our bible right? Frank Each religon has their own extremist.

Click to expand...

Well Brandon - My take on Equal Opportunity - I lived your scenario and did not get an interview or the job because I was white even though I was qualified.
It happened in 1992 right here in Escambia County, I applied for a County position and was told when I turned my app in that because I wasn't -

A. Female
B. Black
or
C. a Black Female, I would not even get an interview, it was a EEO minority hiring cycle, there were not enough minorities in enough positions. They would keep everything on file and well, maybe in the next hiring cycle.

So how do I, did I feel about that?
Then - I got angry about it, who wouldn't. I grumbled about it for awhile then landed a series of even better jobs and have had a colorful career. I've met and worked with people from around the world including some of the dreaded Muslims and gays.
Now - it's a story I tell and laugh about because of the double standard BS that it is.

You quote the Bible and seem to want to take it to task for some of its verses, however, you quote Old Testament, before Christ came, before it was reformed.
The Old Testament is historical and gives us background on the violent world that existed before Christ came. God was vengeful and angry because of the cesspool humanity had become. Christ changed that and after his death and resurrection the whole tone of the scriptures changed.
The New Testament is inspirational and gives guidelines on how we are supposed to live now.
So is homo-sexuality right or wrong? Are people really born gay? You'll have to ask someone higher than me on that.
I know what I believe and God knows what is in my heart -what you do or don't do is between you and God.

Forcing your views or opinions on someone (think of the lawsuits they filed here now) isn't right whether you are gay, straight or unsure.

But hey lets look at Islam since you brought it up -

"The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history. " http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

I don't think you'll find anything like that in the Bible son.


You are all over the board with the points you are trying to make, but to address the OP subject - it's the right of the business to refuse service to a customer. No shoes, no shirt, no service remember. If they lose business because of it, that's on them. If you run a Google search you'll find a story and video showing a gay man that went to Muslim bakeries to try and get a wedding cake made for him and his partner, they refused, told him he had to go somewhere else.
Is that OK? Should they be shut down and or sued because of it, or do they get a pass because of all the sexist / racist / orientation tripe that everyone is jumping on?

Someone wants to be gay, go ahead and let them be the gayest gay they can be ... just don't push it in my face.

"So here is us, on the raggedy edge. Don't push me, and I won't push you." Malcolm Reynolds

Brandon_SPC said:

Okay what is everyones take on the equal oppurtunity act? Say you go to a job interview and they turn you around because you are white no other reason. Hell you don't even get to walk into the door. What is y'alls take on that?

Click to expand...

It's called affirmative action. The government mandates discrimination in the workplace based on color and sex. Why can't a private business owner be afforded the same?

bigbulls said:

It's called affirmative action.

Click to expand...

Thank you bulls - at 12:30 / 1am I couldn't think of the right phrase.

it is a private gun club, private business, no federal money involved, she can do as she wishes..


i support it..matter of fact, i support deportation of all muslims, they are diametrically opposed to our way of life, and religion...the koran teaches them to kill in the name of allah, all infidels...

muslim nation my big old butt....


if anyone believes in co-existing in peace with them, try that with a rattlesnake in your home...

op2:op2:

Brandon_SPC said:

She is restrciting them from her firearms range based off of name and religon alone. Which is a violation of Civil Rights Act of 1964. If this was the case then she could stop people based on their skin color to.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark piece of civil rights legislation in the United States[5] that outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.[6] It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (known as "public accommodations").

Within U.S. law, public accommodations are generally defined as entities, both public and private, that are used by the public. Examples include retail stores, rental establishments and service establishments, as well as educational institutions, recreational facilities and service centers. Private clubs and religious institutions were exempt. However, in 1984, the United States Supreme Court declared the previously all-male Junior Chamber International, a chamber of Commerce organization for persons between the ages of eighteen and thirty-six, to be a public accommodation, which compelled the admission of women into the ranks.[1]

Now I don't agree with the religon but her excuse as to "name and religon" Is that a viable excuse?..... Or switch the roles around if it was a muslim range owner and a Christain customer..... I wonder what would happen... If this a viable excuse then there goes the whole civil rights Martin Luther King Jr fought for right out the door.... and I thought all men were created equal with unalienable Rights?

Click to expand...

Personally I think she is an attention seeking idiot, but the Civil Rights Act of 1964 only applies to businesses that employ 15 or more people.

Of course she's seeking attention. She's a business owner and because of this attention..... business is good. Doesn't sound like an idiot to me.

Until the lawsuits start flowing in. Baseless or not, after a couple she's gonna get strangled by legal fees.

MAXman said:

Until the lawsuits start flowing in. Baseless or not, after a couple she's gonna get strangled by legal fees.

Click to expand...

And then she'll cry like a baby, saying shes being persecuted.

Im sorry, but all of these people that wish to disobey the law based on their religious or personal beliefs need to pack the f%ck up and get out of the country.



The Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993 states in part:

(a) The right of an otherwise qualified person to be free from discrimination because of race, religion, ancestry or national origin, gender, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability is recognized as and declared to be a civil right. This right shall include, but not be limited to:

1) The right to obtain and hold employment without discrimination;

2) The right to the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges or any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement;



They are certainly welcome to work to change the law within legal means, but until they do so, that have a responsibility to obey the law, just like everyone else. Its the law. Her personal beliefs, and what she likes and doesn't like, are immaterial.




And before anyone pops in and brings up the "private club" issue: If anyone can walk in off the street and use the range, which it certainly appears is true, then its not a "private club".

donr101395 said:

Personally I think she is an attention seeking idiot, but the Civil Rights Act of 1964 only applies to businesses that employ 15 or more people.

Click to expand...

My reading of this is that the 15 employees exemption applies to Title VII only, which deals with employment discrimination, and not the entire act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#Title_VII

OH GAWD, here we go again with the liberal BS whining! You just want to get all the topics shut down, start arguments and show your backside all the time?

Frank,Maybe just Maybe he is showing the law as written!!! Dosen't have a damn thing about being a lib or trying to get anything shut down. Will someone tell Frank this through a cut and paste as he dosen't read my posts.

Getting back to the crux of the issue.....could someone not want to shoot at her range if they walk in and see two guys with diapers on their heads shooting AK's?? I think she makes a valid point. And if you disagree that's fine, why don't you be the one to shoot in the lane next to them?

I think she is doing a smart thing as she say's that she does not allow KKK or any other such group to shoot there. Anytime you have people who right or wrong absolutely hate other people the possibility of violence is there. Throw in leathel weapons and then you really have a cluster.

BTW neither side on this board is going to change the others opinion no matter how many threads get derailed and turn into a pissing contest. JMHO

Idoono

Ski...I'd just like to add the case that passed in the Supreme Court, the 'Hobby Lobby' case which did in fact win against what you are arguing...that no private business can discriminate against popular liberal views or interpretation of federal law. I'm not personally against any Muslims, Islamic or otherwise....but do not come into our country that was established on Judeo-Christian law and cry wolf when there are no parades and days off of school for your culture or religion. Celebrate them amongst you folks in your family/nieghborhood setting.