LGBT extremists shamelessly cause a scene at a Target store.

[The Scandinvans]

The groups have the right to discourage people from shopping at target.
They left when ordered to they could be served with trespassing charges if they come back.
Hijacking the intercoms might be something that could subject them to a civil penalty, I am not certain on that point of law.

What they did was quite foolhardy and morally awkward, but you are correct. They do not deserve, at legally and morally, deserve to face legal charges.

What does "morally awkward" mean?

They are creating a nuisance in a place where they have no evidence that should logically conclude that the people they were chanting against were involved directly with the funding. As well, if you want to be more effective go to a Target corporate HQ, much more effective then assailing individuals and employees of a branch of it. Or hand out little sheets of papers indicating your objectives without swearing at them.

[EvilDarkMagicians]

...and uploads it onto youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1inmoke ... re=popular

I want to know if other LGBT people find their actions are justified, or ashamed a group of people that tries to represent them acted so immaturely. They are angry Target apparently donated 150,000 dollars to the campaign of somebody that doesn't support gay marriage, so their argument is you're hate-filled and discriminate if you don't support the special treatment of LGBT. They call target bigoted, but in the description, the videomaker writes "Call Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel at 612-696-6234 and DEMAND they get the $150,000 back or donate $150,000 to queer youth or transgender services!"
That sounds bigoted to me, them supporting the special treatment of LGBT.

Good.

[Daistallia 2104]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

[Dododecapod]

They call target bigoted, but in the description, the videomaker writes "Call Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel at 612-696-6234 and DEMAND they get the $150,000 back or donate $150,000 to queer youth or transgender services!"
That sounds bigoted to me, them supporting the special treatment of LGBT.

What a crock of shit. "Ahh, these damn Jews are protesting about a million-dollar donation to a Nazi organisation! When will they learn that they don't deserve any special treatment? Those bigoted fuckers."

If people were talking against homosexuals, you would most likely agree they should be arrested. Free speech comes with the tolerance of others.

BULLSHIT. There is no right to not be offended.

There is when it is a private place and the store has the deserve to maintain a general state of duo quorum on their premise. Under that logic I can go into a store that is frequented by gay persons and hand out pamphlets advocating something that is offensive to their way of life, while not expecting to be ejected from the store. If it was a public place, like a park or street corner, then it would be different. But the moment you enter a private place of business you surrender the expectation to be allowed to speak freely.

No, you're totally wrong. ALL that can happen is that you will be asked to leave. As happened here.

[The Scandinvans]

Harassing shoppers, handing out soliciting material, causing a disturbance, and filming people against their wishes: Why weren't these people arrested?

Because it was a protest.

On private property.

It wasn't acting as private property until they were asked to leave---which they did.

We'd all be so lucky if TPers protested this politely.

In American law stores are private property. That is why they can fly the no soliciting sign. In theory it is merely considered a public place of commerce, e.g. everyone has the right to enter so long as they do not steal or make a situation.

[Haiz]

The AFA does the same thing.

So? Does that justify the LGBT people being obnoxious, yelling profanities at shoppers in a store, saying they are fueling hatred and discrimination?

No, the first Amendment does that.

Maybe on public property, but Target is private property.

Which is open to public access. They can withdraw your right to be there, but they can't force you to shut up.

Target's solicitation policy is very easy to find on the internet, and it clearly says that Target does not allow solicitation or petitioning at their stores (this group was engaging in both). This group planned this out, and intentionally broke Target's policies. They weren't justified in being obnoxious, yelling profanities at shoppers in a store, and/or saying they are fueling hatred and discrimination.

Target's policies are irrelevant. Justification is irrelevant. What they did remains legal, and that's the only important aspect. Well, that and whether they got their point across.

Target's policies are NOT irrelevant, since the store is private property. It's not legal to create a disturbance, harass people, film/photograph people against their stated wishes, or solicit in a place where solicitation isn't allowed.

"Creating a Disturbance" is a subjective decision that can only be made by a Police Officer. Filming in a public area (privately owned or not) is legal. And Target's rules on solicitation, or their policies in general, have no power of law. ALL they can do is ask you to leave - or request that police arrest someone who refuses to leave for trespassing.
Companies may ACT like their policies mean something, but unless you work for them, they don't.

Indeed, if you started to get unruly in any public environment, unless you were committing a crime of vandalism or assault, youd nearly always be asked to leave via a valid policy. The policy can be challenged, but it is still invalid to say that speaking is the crime here. Hate speech is not a crime. Refusing and being unruly in refusal and persistence,violation of store policy without leaving is.

[Zephie]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

[Greed and Death]

The groups have the right to discourage people from shopping at target.
They left when ordered to they could be served with trespassing charges if they come back.
Hijacking the intercoms might be something that could subject them to a civil penalty, I am not certain on that point of law.

What they did was quite foolhardy and morally awkward, but you are correct. They do not deserve, at legally and morally, deserve to face legal charges.

What does "morally awkward" mean?

They are creating a nuisance in a place where they have no evidence that should logically conclude that the people they were chanting against were involved directly with the funding. As well, if you want to be more effective go to a Target corporate HQ, much more effective then assailing individuals and employees of a branch of it. Or hand out little sheets of papers indicating your objectives without swearing at them.

I find the protest a bit silly it is common practice to donate to both sides in political races by big corporations. Sort of hedging their bets for favoritism.

[Daistallia 2104]

Has political protest/civil disobedience been brought down to such a state that shouting through a megaphone is now seen as an act of 'extremism'?

Pitiful.

T'would seem so.

[Ryadn]

I completely support the protest and how it was performed. My only complaint is that they were saying "shit" over the megaphone thing when there could have been kids in the store. Even then I don't really care and I think it is worth it to inform people of who their corporations are endorsing.

That was the only issue I had, too. I would have liked the language to be clean, because there usually ARE kids in Target.

[Gun Manufacturers]

The AFA does the same thing.

So? Does that justify the LGBT people being obnoxious, yelling profanities at shoppers in a store, saying they are fueling hatred and discrimination?

No, the first Amendment does that.

Maybe on public property, but Target is private property.

Its their first amendment right to peacefully assemble. They did not destroy anything, and the store could request that they move or leave.

It's not a first amendment right to cause a public disturbance, harass others, film/photograph people against their stated wishes, and solicit on private property in violation of company policy.

And what would the company do? Ask them to leave. Thats first step id assume for people getting a bit to rowdy or unruly? Show me where they resisted any commands and caused a public disturbance.

They continued to film Target employees after the employees stated they weren't allowed to bring a video camera into the store, and didn't want to be filmed. They also took their sweet time leaving (the guy with the camera didn't move until the second request to leave, and continued to argue with the employees as they were being escorted out). As to the disturbance, shouting into a bullhorn (with the occasional swear), in the middle of the store, isn't a disturbance? It sure seems that way to me.

[The Scandinvans]

They call target bigoted, but in the description, the videomaker writes "Call Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel at 612-696-6234 and DEMAND they get the $150,000 back or donate $150,000 to queer youth or transgender services!"
That sounds bigoted to me, them supporting the special treatment of LGBT.

What a crock of shit. "Ahh, these damn Jews are protesting about a million-dollar donation to a Nazi organisation! When will they learn that they don't deserve any special treatment? Those bigoted fuckers."

If people were talking against homosexuals, you would most likely agree they should be arrested. Free speech comes with the tolerance of others.

BULLSHIT. There is no right to not be offended.

There is when it is a private place and the store has the deserve to maintain a general state of duo quorum on their premise. Under that logic I can go into a store that is frequented by gay persons and hand out pamphlets advocating something that is offensive to their way of life, while not expecting to be ejected from the store. If it was a public place, like a park or street corner, then it would be different. But the moment you enter a private place of business you surrender the expectation to be allowed to speak freely.

No, you're totally wrong. ALL that can happen is that you will be asked to leave. As happened here.

Actually you can be arrested for trespassing, being a nuisance, and solicitation by the police; e.g. the threat of being charged with trespassing. In a publicly owned place, you can usually own face one of those charges, e.g. being a public nuisance.

[Ryadn]

Well, it seems that the minority has the right to harrass the majority.

ABSOLUTELY! It's called free speech.

Yeah, you would be saying that if it was conservatives protesting anti-gay marriage.

*squints* I don't think that says what you think it says.

[The Black Forrest]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

So what exactly is the purpose of marriage?

[Zephie]

The groups have the right to discourage people from shopping at target.
They left when ordered to they could be served with trespassing charges if they come back.
Hijacking the intercoms might be something that could subject them to a civil penalty, I am not certain on that point of law.

What they did was quite foolhardy and morally awkward, but you are correct. They do not deserve, at legally and morally, deserve to face legal charges.

What does "morally awkward" mean?

They are creating a nuisance in a place where they have no evidence that should logically conclude that the people they were chanting against were involved directly with the funding. As well, if you want to be more effective go to a Target corporate HQ, much more effective then assailing individuals and employees of a branch of it. Or hand out little sheets of papers indicating your objectives without swearing at them.

I find the protest a bit silly it is common practice to donate to both sides in political races by big corporations. Sort of hedging their bets for favoritism.

Especially when virtually every republican doesn't support gay marriage, so their logic is supporting any Republican means you are a hateful bigot.

[Dododecapod]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

How about "I love this person and want him to have the same rights with me as brother has with his wife"?

[The Scandinvans]

The groups have the right to discourage people from shopping at target.
They left when ordered to they could be served with trespassing charges if they come back.
Hijacking the intercoms might be something that could subject them to a civil penalty, I am not certain on that point of law.

What they did was quite foolhardy and morally awkward, but you are correct. They do not deserve, at legally and morally, deserve to face legal charges.

What does "morally awkward" mean?

They are creating a nuisance in a place where they have no evidence that should logically conclude that the people they were chanting against were involved directly with the funding. As well, if you want to be more effective go to a Target corporate HQ, much more effective then assailing individuals and employees of a branch of it. Or hand out little sheets of papers indicating your objectives without swearing at them.

I find the protest a bit silly it is common practice to donate to both sides in political races by big corporations. Sort of hedging their bets for favoritism.

Indeed. In California or more 'progressive' states you will probably see them funding pro-gay marriage politicians. If I am correct Target did donate some money to Pelosi.

[Zephie]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

How about "I love this person and want him to have the same rights with me as brother has with his wife"?

Something should be done so you can see someone if they are in a hospital or something, but gay marriage isn't the answer to that.

[Ryadn]

They call target bigoted, but in the description, the videomaker writes "Call Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel at 612-696-6234 and DEMAND they get the $150,000 back or donate $150,000 to queer youth or transgender services!"
That sounds bigoted to me, them supporting the special treatment of LGBT.

What a crock of shit. "Ahh, these damn Jews are protesting about a million-dollar donation to a Nazi organisation! When will they learn that they don't deserve any special treatment? Those bigoted fuckers."

If people were talking against homosexuals, you would most likely agree they should be arrested. Free speech comes with the tolerance of others.

What the hell? Who in their right minds would advocate arresting people for "talking against homosexuals"? Where do you even get this stuff from?

[Zephie]

The groups have the right to discourage people from shopping at target.
They left when ordered to they could be served with trespassing charges if they come back.
Hijacking the intercoms might be something that could subject them to a civil penalty, I am not certain on that point of law.

What they did was quite foolhardy and morally awkward, but you are correct. They do not deserve, at legally and morally, deserve to face legal charges.

What does "morally awkward" mean?

They are creating a nuisance in a place where they have no evidence that should logically conclude that the people they were chanting against were involved directly with the funding. As well, if you want to be more effective go to a Target corporate HQ, much more effective then assailing individuals and employees of a branch of it. Or hand out little sheets of papers indicating your objectives without swearing at them.

I find the protest a bit silly it is common practice to donate to both sides in political races by big corporations. Sort of hedging their bets for favoritism.

Indeed. In California or more 'progressive' states you will probably see them funding pro-gay marriage politicians. If I am correct Target did donate some money to Pelosi.

Target donated money to Pelosi? Now I don't want to shop at Target. lol.

[The Black Forrest]

The groups have the right to discourage people from shopping at target.
They left when ordered to they could be served with trespassing charges if they come back.
Hijacking the intercoms might be something that could subject them to a civil penalty, I am not certain on that point of law.

What they did was quite foolhardy and morally awkward, but you are correct. They do not deserve, at legally and morally, deserve to face legal charges.

What does "morally awkward" mean?

They are creating a nuisance in a place where they have no evidence that should logically conclude that the people they were chanting against were involved directly with the funding. As well, if you want to be more effective go to a Target corporate HQ, much more effective then assailing individuals and employees of a branch of it. Or hand out little sheets of papers indicating your objectives without swearing at them.

I find the protest a bit silly it is common practice to donate to both sides in political races by big corporations. Sort of hedging their bets for favoritism.

Especially when virtually every republican doesn't support gay marriage, so their logic is supporting any Republican means you are a hateful bigot.

Nah. Not everybody. But there are a large number of hateful bigots who call themselves Republicans......

[Dododecapod]

They call target bigoted, but in the description, the videomaker writes "Call Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel at 612-696-6234 and DEMAND they get the $150,000 back or donate $150,000 to queer youth or transgender services!"
That sounds bigoted to me, them supporting the special treatment of LGBT.

What a crock of shit. "Ahh, these damn Jews are protesting about a million-dollar donation to a Nazi organisation! When will they learn that they don't deserve any special treatment? Those bigoted fuckers."

If people were talking against homosexuals, you would most likely agree they should be arrested. Free speech comes with the tolerance of others.

BULLSHIT. There is no right to not be offended.

There is when it is a private place and the store has the deserve to maintain a general state of duo quorum on their premise. Under that logic I can go into a store that is frequented by gay persons and hand out pamphlets advocating something that is offensive to their way of life, while not expecting to be ejected from the store. If it was a public place, like a park or street corner, then it would be different. But the moment you enter a private place of business you surrender the expectation to be allowed to speak freely.

No, you're totally wrong. ALL that can happen is that you will be asked to leave. As happened here.

Actually you can be arrested for trespassing, being a nuisance, and solicitation by the police; e.g. the threat of being charged with trespassing. In a publicly owned place, you can usually own face one of those charges, e.g. being a public nuisance.

There is no difference. You cannot be arrested if you move on when asked - and the police can request that of you in a public area, too, with the same possible results.

[Haiz]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

In a church, maybe. Having the government not recognizing it based on one group's legislated and baseless moral fearmongering is different.

[Greed and Death]

Actually you can be arrested for trespassing, being a nuisance, and solicitation by the police; e.g. the threat of being charged with trespassing. In a publicly owned place, you can usually own face one of those charges, e.g. being a public nuisance.

To be arrested for trespassing in a place that is open for commerce you have to be asked to leave then refuse to do so. Your public nuisance and disorderly conduct charges normally depend on you refusing to cease the behavior when told to do so by the police or property owners. Though these laws differ by state.
Once they were told to leave they left so criminal charges are unlikely to happen and would be tossed out even if they did manage to get before a judge.

[Zephie]

They call target bigoted, but in the description, the videomaker writes "Call Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel at 612-696-6234 and DEMAND they get the $150,000 back or donate $150,000 to queer youth or transgender services!"
That sounds bigoted to me, them supporting the special treatment of LGBT.

What a crock of shit. "Ahh, these damn Jews are protesting about a million-dollar donation to a Nazi organisation! When will they learn that they don't deserve any special treatment? Those bigoted fuckers."

If people were talking against homosexuals, you would most likely agree they should be arrested. Free speech comes with the tolerance of others.

BULLSHIT. There is no right to not be offended.

There is when it is a private place and the store has the deserve to maintain a general state of duo quorum on their premise. Under that logic I can go into a store that is frequented by gay persons and hand out pamphlets advocating something that is offensive to their way of life, while not expecting to be ejected from the store. If it was a public place, like a park or street corner, then it would be different. But the moment you enter a private place of business you surrender the expectation to be allowed to speak freely.

No, you're totally wrong. ALL that can happen is that you will be asked to leave. As happened here.

Actually you can be arrested for trespassing, being a nuisance, and solicitation by the police; e.g. the threat of being charged with trespassing. In a publicly owned place, you can usually own face one of those charges, e.g. being a public nuisance.

There is no difference. You cannot be arrested if you move on when asked - and the police can request that of you in a public area, too, with the same possible results.

They were still filming when they were requested to stop filming and proceeded to post the video on the internet. They should have blurred out the faces of the employees, but they are driven by hate.