TOTALLY GEEKED!

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

RE: Mike Huckabee: "We Are Moving Rapidly Toward The Criminalization Of Christianity"

Ohfour · Hooker

I'm really just asking a question. Should an ordained minister (that's NOT affiliated with a church) be forced to officiate same sex ceremonies? What's the difference between a for hire minister and baker?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
I'm really just asking a question. Should an ordained minister (that's NOT affiliated with a church) be forced to officiate same sex ceremonies? What's the difference between a for hire minister and baker?

That's a bit more complicated. The baker is easy, though.

I guess I would hope that if a person became an ordained minister, they would need to consider the possibility that they might be called upon to marry people they disapproved of...whether it means couples who lived together, a person who has had multiple divorces, or a homosexual couple.

flan

Ohfour · Hooker

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
I'm really just asking a question. Should an ordained minister (that's NOT affiliated with a church) be forced to officiate same sex ceremonies? What's the difference between a for hire minister and baker?
That's a bit more complicated. The baker is easy, though.
I guess I would hope that if a person became an ordained minister, they would need to consider the possibility that they might be called upon to marry people they disapproved of...whether it means couples who lived together, a person who has had multiple divorces, or a homosexual couple.
flan

They have that freedom NOW. Do you condone taking that away from them?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
I'm really just asking a question. Should an ordained minister (that's NOT affiliated with a church) be forced to officiate same sex ceremonies? What's the difference between a for hire minister and baker?
That's a bit more complicated. The baker is easy, though.
I guess I would hope that if a person became an ordained minister, they would need to consider the possibility that they might be called upon to marry people they disapproved of...whether it means couples who lived together, a person who has had multiple divorces, or a homosexual couple.
flan
They have that freedom NOW. Do you condone taking that away from them?

Freedom to refuse?

flan

chef · Guru

I'm tired of atheists, agnostics, and other non-religious folk wanting Christians to just shut up and deal with it. Religious freedom doesn't matter to you because you aren't religious. You do not understand where Christians come from on issues like this because you don't even hold the Bible to be true.

The Bible is explicitly clear that homosexual acts are a sin. It would not matter if a heterosexual decided to have homosexual sex. I, personally, do not believe that BEING homosexual is a sin. I believe that the ACT (sex) is the sin. The Bible cautions against false prophets. Churches that ignore what the Bible says re homosexual acts are false prophets. Loving another person does not mean condoning their sin. Refusing to have anything to do with sin is not hate.

I believe a Christian can serve homosexuals and still be right with God. If a homosexual couple wants to eat at a Christian restaurant, I don't see a Biblical basis for refusal of service. However, weddings are different. The Bible teaches that marriage is a covenant between man, woman, and God. Participating in a homosexual wedding is ignoring that covenant and condoning the sin of homosexual sex. Baking a cake FOR that wedding is participating whether you want to see it or not.

Ohfour · Hooker

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
I'm really just asking a question. Should an ordained minister (that's NOT affiliated with a church) be forced to officiate same sex ceremonies? What's the difference between a for hire minister and baker?
That's a bit more complicated. The baker is easy, though.
I guess I would hope that if a person became an ordained minister, they would need to consider the possibility that they might be called upon to marry people they disapproved of...whether it means couples who lived together, a person who has had multiple divorces, or a homosexual couple.
flan
They have that freedom NOW. Do you condone taking that away from them?
Freedom to refuse?
flan

Yep. They can refuse for all sorts of reasons. Divorce, same sex. Some require counseling before marriage. Are you saying that all of that should be thrown out the window?

Tinydancer · Guru

chef wrote:
I'm tired of atheists, agnostics, and other non-religious folk wanting Christians to just shut up and deal with it. Religious freedom doesn't matter to you because you aren't religious. You do not understand where Christians come from on issues like this because you don't even hold the Bible to be true.

The Bible is explicitly clear that homosexual acts are a sin. It would not matter if a heterosexual decided to have homosexual sex. I, personally, do not believe that BEING homosexual is a sin. I believe that the ACT (sex) is the sin. The Bible cautions against false prophets. Churches that ignore what the Bible says re homosexual acts are false prophets. Loving another person does not mean condoning their sin. Refusing to have anything to do with sin is not hate.

I believe a Christian can serve homosexuals and still be right with God. If a homosexual couple wants to eat at a Christian restaurant, I don't see a Biblical basis for refusal of service. However, weddings are different. The Bible teaches that marriage is a covenant between man, woman, and God. Participating in a homosexual wedding is ignoring that covenant and condoning the sin of homosexual sex. Baking a cake FOR that wedding is participating whether you want to see it or not.

All of this!!!!!!!

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

I wonder why no one sues a Muslim or Jewish bakery for not making a cake. I'm sure there have been some that turned down the opportunity to make a cake for a gay wedding. Oh wait, could it be because suing a Muslim or Jewish bakery isn't PC and wouldn't garner attention?

Ohfour · Hooker

The ultimate conundrum...

If a Muslim bakery refused to bake a gay wedding cake, who would the liberals support...

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

flan327 wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
I do. I do think there is a collective think that says their wants trumps everyone's rights.
You don't CHOOSE your sexual orientation.
flan

What are you talking about?

I am talking about want verses right.

Of course I don't expect you to understand the difference.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chef wrote:
I'm tired of atheists, agnostics, and other non-religious folk wanting Christians to just shut up and deal with it. Religious freedom doesn't matter to you because you aren't religious. You do not understand where Christians come from on issues like this because you don't even hold the Bible to be true.

The Bible is explicitly clear that homosexual acts are a sin. It would not matter if a heterosexual decided to have homosexual sex. I, personally, do not believe that BEING homosexual is a sin. I believe that the ACT (sex) is the sin. The Bible cautions against false prophets. Churches that ignore what the Bible says re homosexual acts are false prophets. Loving another person does not mean condoning their sin. Refusing to have anything to do with sin is not hate.

I believe a Christian can serve homosexuals and still be right with God. If a homosexual couple wants to eat at a Christian restaurant, I don't see a Biblical basis for refusal of service. However, weddings are different. The Bible teaches that marriage is a covenant between man, woman, and God. Participating in a homosexual wedding is ignoring that covenant and condoning the sin of homosexual sex. Baking a cake FOR that wedding is participating whether you want to see it or not.

That's simply wrong. I do, in fact, understand where you Christians are coming from.

I still think it's discrimination.

flan

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
The ultimate conundrum...

If a Muslim bakery refused to bake a gay wedding cake, who would the liberals support...

Hillary...

biggrin

flan

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

flan327 wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Saying "People are getting sick and tired of you using religion as a way to discriminate against gays and lesbians, and you may no longer do that, but must treat everyone fairly regardless of sexual orientation." is a very, very long ways away from saying "You must convert to another faith or be an athiest because being a Christian is now illegal, now stand aside as we demolish your place of worship."
This article is pure BS, designed to stir up trouble.
I am all for freedom of religion, but I am so sick and tired of people using their religion--any religion--to treat others poorly. What is the point? If your religion inspires you to be a kind person, a loving person, and it gives you hope and peace, then you do your religion right, and good for you! If it makes you nasty and judgmental, then no, you are doing your religion wrong, and
I have an aunt and uncle that are Catholic. They run their own business, and in the winter they sell garlands and wreaths and the like. Sometimes I help out. This last year they had a sizable order from a lesbian couple in town that were having an anniversary party just before Christmas. My aunt and uncle never considered turning them away for being gay. They are the kindest, most welcoming people I know, and they and their children do religion right.
In my opinion, most of the people on this board are failing at religion. It is a sad statement on the state of the world that the nice, kind, and wise people I know IRL are evenly split between Christians and athiests, but all of the nasty and judgmental ones are Christians.
My religion tells me not to condone sin so why does anyone else get to tell me I must condone a sin. Homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible but you can just continue to tell me how I'm treating them poorly because I won't make a cake. There are plenty of bakers who have no problem with it so I'm sick and tired of being told that what they want is more important than my religion. By the way the bolded may be what you think religion is but it's not.
Because I do not CARE what you think is a sin, because our laws are no longer dependent on the Bible. Being gay is not against the law here. They have a right to exist, a right to the same services as everyone else. You can have your religion, and worship freely, but no, you may not discriminate. That is that. If treating people equally regardless of sexual orientation goes against your religion, well, sucks to be you, because it is the law in plenty of places now. Deal with it, grow up, move on. The world will not end if you treat people equally regardless of who they sleep with. It won't, I promise.
And this isn't about cake, this is about some president-wanna-be trying to start a panic wave to ride into the White House with. A dumb panic wave.
Well I do not care what you think isn't a sin. The Bible tells me what is and isn't sin, not you, not the government. If I won't bake you a cake for a gay wedding go find someone else to do it. Well, sucks to be you so take your own advise and Deal with it, grow up, move on.
The Bible doesn't dictate the laws of the country you live in, so you are the one out of luck, not me.
Thank goodness!
flan

Umm... Actually, our laws ARE based on the Bible. The Ten Commandments ring a bell?

Lexxy · My dog name is Sasha, too!

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
The ultimate conundrum...

If a Muslim bakery refused to bake a gay wedding cake, who would the liberals support...
Hillary...
flan

This made me laugh!

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

lilyofcourse wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Saying "People are getting sick and tired of you using religion as a way to discriminate against gays and lesbians, and you may no longer do that, but must treat everyone fairly regardless of sexual orientation." is a very, very long ways away from saying "You must convert to another faith or be an athiest because being a Christian is now illegal, now stand aside as we demolish your place of worship."
This article is pure BS, designed to stir up trouble.
I am all for freedom of religion, but I am so sick and tired of people using their religion--any religion--to treat others poorly. What is the point? If your religion inspires you to be a kind person, a loving person, and it gives you hope and peace, then you do your religion right, and good for you! If it makes you nasty and judgmental, then no, you are doing your religion wrong, and
I have an aunt and uncle that are Catholic. They run their own business, and in the winter they sell garlands and wreaths and the like. Sometimes I help out. This last year they had a sizable order from a lesbian couple in town that were having an anniversary party just before Christmas. My aunt and uncle never considered turning them away for being gay. They are the kindest, most welcoming people I know, and they and their children do religion right.
In my opinion, most of the people on this board are failing at religion. It is a sad statement on the state of the world that the nice, kind, and wise people I know IRL are evenly split between Christians and athiests, but all of the nasty and judgmental ones are Christians.
My religion tells me not to condone sin so why does anyone else get to tell me I must condone a sin. Homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible but you can just continue to tell me how I'm treating them poorly because I won't make a cake. There are plenty of bakers who have no problem with it so I'm sick and tired of being told that what they want is more important than my religion. By the way the bolded may be what you think religion is but it's not.
Because I do not CARE what you think is a sin, because our laws are no longer dependent on the Bible. Being gay is not against the law here. They have a right to exist, a right to the same services as everyone else. You can have your religion, and worship freely, but no, you may not discriminate. That is that. If treating people equally regardless of sexual orientation goes against your religion, well, sucks to be you, because it is the law in plenty of places now. Deal with it, grow up, move on. The world will not end if you treat people equally regardless of who they sleep with. It won't, I promise.
And this isn't about cake, this is about some president-wanna-be trying to start a panic wave to ride into the White House with. A dumb panic wave.
Well I do not care what you think isn't a sin. The Bible tells me what is and isn't sin, not you, not the government. If I won't bake you a cake for a gay wedding go find someone else to do it. Well, sucks to be you so take your own advise and Deal with it, grow up, move on.
The Bible doesn't dictate the laws of the country you live in, so you are the one out of luck, not me.
Thank goodness!
flan
Umm... Actually, our laws ARE based on the Bible. The Ten Commandments ring a bell?

Ummm...I've actually commented on that upthread.

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
I'm tired of atheists, agnostics, and other non-religious folk wanting Christians to just shut up and deal with it. Religious freedom doesn't matter to you because you aren't religious. You do not understand where Christians come from on issues like this because you don't even hold the Bible to be true.

The Bible is explicitly clear that homosexual acts are a sin. It would not matter if a heterosexual decided to have homosexual sex. I, personally, do not believe that BEING homosexual is a sin. I believe that the ACT (sex) is the sin. The Bible cautions against false prophets. Churches that ignore what the Bible says re homosexual acts are false prophets. Loving another person does not mean condoning their sin. Refusing to have anything to do with sin is not hate.

I believe a Christian can serve homosexuals and still be right with God. If a homosexual couple wants to eat at a Christian restaurant, I don't see a Biblical basis for refusal of service. However, weddings are different. The Bible teaches that marriage is a covenant between man, woman, and God. Participating in a homosexual wedding is ignoring that covenant and condoning the sin of homosexual sex. Baking a cake FOR that wedding is participating whether you want to see it or not.
That's simply wrong. I do, in fact, understand where you Christians are coming from.
I still think it's discrimination.
flan

Then, NO, you don't.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Saying "People are getting sick and tired of you using religion as a way to discriminate against gays and lesbians, and you may no longer do that, but must treat everyone fairly regardless of sexual orientation." is a very, very long ways away from saying "You must convert to another faith or be an athiest because being a Christian is now illegal, now stand aside as we demolish your place of worship."
This article is pure BS, designed to stir up trouble.
I am all for freedom of religion, but I am so sick and tired of people using their religion--any religion--to treat others poorly. What is the point? If your religion inspires you to be a kind person, a loving person, and it gives you hope and peace, then you do your religion right, and good for you! If it makes you nasty and judgmental, then no, you are doing your religion wrong, and
I have an aunt and uncle that are Catholic. They run their own business, and in the winter they sell garlands and wreaths and the like. Sometimes I help out. This last year they had a sizable order from a lesbian couple in town that were having an anniversary party just before Christmas. My aunt and uncle never considered turning them away for being gay. They are the kindest, most welcoming people I know, and they and their children do religion right.
In my opinion, most of the people on this board are failing at religion. It is a sad statement on the state of the world that the nice, kind, and wise people I know IRL are evenly split between Christians and athiests, but all of the nasty and judgmental ones are Christians.
My religion tells me not to condone sin so why does anyone else get to tell me I must condone a sin. Homosexuality is a sin according to the Bible but you can just continue to tell me how I'm treating them poorly because I won't make a cake. There are plenty of bakers who have no problem with it so I'm sick and tired of being told that what they want is more important than my religion. By the way the bolded may be what you think religion is but it's not.
Because I do not CARE what you think is a sin, because our laws are no longer dependent on the Bible. Being gay is not against the law here. They have a right to exist, a right to the same services as everyone else. You can have your religion, and worship freely, but no, you may not discriminate. That is that. If treating people equally regardless of sexual orientation goes against your religion, well, sucks to be you, because it is the law in plenty of places now. Deal with it, grow up, move on. The world will not end if you treat people equally regardless of who they sleep with. It won't, I promise.
And this isn't about cake, this is about some president-wanna-be trying to start a panic wave to ride into the White House with. A dumb panic wave.
Well I do not care what you think isn't a sin. The Bible tells me what is and isn't sin, not you, not the government. If I won't bake you a cake for a gay wedding go find someone else to do it. Well, sucks to be you so take your own advise and Deal with it, grow up, move on.
The Bible doesn't dictate the laws of the country you live in, so you are the one out of luck, not me.
Thank goodness!
flan
Umm... Actually, our laws ARE based on the Bible. The Ten Commandments ring a bell?
Ummm...I've actually commented on that upthread.
flan

The Bible may not dictate our laws, but the Constitution does - and it guarantees freedom of religion.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
So Dona, do you condone forcing an ordained minister to perform a wedding ceremony? I can't seem to get an answer on anyone about that...
Nope.
And I think that people that target others specifically to cause trouble don't deserve to get their lawsuits heard. Save discrimination lawsuits for when they are needed, and be reasonable about it.
So what's the difference between the baker and the minister?
One bakes for money. THe other doesn't. Is this really a question?
No wonder you haven't gotten anywhere with it. It is a very stupid question.

Ministers are paid. I don't get your point.

Ohfour · Hooker

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
So Dona, do you condone forcing an ordained minister to perform a wedding ceremony? I can't seem to get an answer on anyone about that...
Nope.
And I think that people that target others specifically to cause trouble don't deserve to get their lawsuits heard. Save discrimination lawsuits for when they are needed, and be reasonable about it.
So what's the difference between the baker and the minister?
One bakes for money. THe other doesn't. Is this really a question?
No wonder you haven't gotten anywhere with it. It is a very stupid question.
Ministers are paid. I don't get your point.

Ten to one, she doesn't respond...you know, cause it's a stupid question and all. Obviously, she think ministers live off handouts...

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.

Ohfour · Hooker

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.

So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.

They only discriminate because their book tells them to.

flan

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........

Let's see...I think one bakes cakes & the other performs wedding ceremonies...

flan

Ohfour · Hooker

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........
Let's see...I think one bakes cakes & the other performs wedding ceremonies...
flan

You know what I mean...

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

InsistOhfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........

I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.

But, since you need the obvious pointed out. . .

Ministers are generally affiliated with specific churches or branches of christiianity. Many with very specific rules about who they will or will not marry already. A minister is generLly religious by default, and since theire religion is part and parcel of their job, they have an actual leg to stand on when citing religious objections.

Bakeries are not religious. Neither are cakes.

Why you needed that spellled out is beyond me. It is fairly self explanitory. . .

Ohfour · Hooker

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
InsistOhfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........
I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.
But, since you need the obvious pointed out. . .
Ministers are generally affiliated with specific churches or branches of christiianity. Many with very specific rules about who they will or will not marry already. A minister is generLly religious by default, and since theire religion is part and parcel of their job, they have an actual leg to stand on when citing religious objections.
Bakeries are not religious. Neither are cakes.
Why you needed that spellled out is beyond me. It is fairly self explanitory. . .

No, it's totally hypocritical (but I expect no less). If a minister is being PAID, same as a bakery, then I would think the same rules would apply. And Christians DO feel that their religion is part and parcel to their LIVE, not just their jobs. Not all ministers are affiliated with a church. In fact, I would wager that MOST ordained ministers are NOT affiliated with a church.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.

This attitude is why I don't really care what the other side has to say. It's rude and filled with hatred. So don't patronize ME and tell ME you know all about love and touchy feely goodness when this is how you "debate" with people who don't agree with you. If you are standing there saying that the other side is fvcking stupid I'm not sure why you think they're going to care about what YOU think. And I think you're delusional if you think that attitude is going to win people over.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
InsistOhfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........
I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.
But, since you need the obvious pointed out. . .
Ministers are generally affiliated with specific churches or branches of christiianity. Many with very specific rules about who they will or will not marry already. A minister is generLly religious by default, and since theire religion is part and parcel of their job, they have an actual leg to stand on when citing religious objections.
Bakeries are not religious. Neither are cakes.
Why you needed that spellled out is beyond me. It is fairly self explanitory. . .

Bakeries are not religious. Cakes are not religious. But, BAKERS are human beings with religious beliefs.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
They only discriminate because their book tells them to.
flan

Wow. Really? EVERY religion is making JUDGMENTS flan. Hello. Do you presume Murder to be wrong? Why? That is a JUDGMENT. Sheesh. confuse

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.

This attitude is why I don't really care what the other side has to say. It's rude and filled with hatred. So don't patronize ME and tell ME you know all about love and touchy feely goodness when this is how you "debate" with people who don't agree with you. If you are standing there saying that the other side is fvcking stupid I'm not sure why you think they're going to care about what YOU think. And I think you're delusional if you think that attitude is going to win people over.

What is the difference between a baker and a minister?? Seriously

I didn't namecall or say anyone was stupid for asking. . . but COME ON.

Ask a better question.

Dona Worry Be Happy · Vette's SS!!

And if you are going to call it hypocriticalto aacknowledge the inherent religion in being a minister and saying that there is a difference and we can cut them some slack, then fine, minister have to play too. Zero religious exemptions. Is that less hypocritical enough? Happy now?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
InsistOhfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........
I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.
But, since you need the obvious pointed out. . .
Ministers are generally affiliated with specific churches or branches of christiianity. Many with very specific rules about who they will or will not marry already. A minister is generLly religious by default, and since theire religion is part and parcel of their job, they have an actual leg to stand on when citing religious objections.
Bakeries are not religious. Neither are cakes.
Why you needed that spellled out is beyond me. It is fairly self explanitory. . .
No, it's totally hypocritical (but I expect no less). If a minister is being PAID, same as a bakery, then I would think the same rules would apply. And Christians DO feel that their religion is part and parcel to their LIVE, not just their jobs. Not all ministers are affiliated with a church. In fact, I would wager that MOST ordained ministers are NOT affiliated with a church.

This confuses me. Why be a minister in the first place?

flan

Ohfour · Hooker

Maybe they had a church at one time and no longer do. So they officiate weddings and other ceremonies. I know A LOT of ordained ministers that don't have a church. I work with 4...

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
And if you are going to call it hypocriticalto aacknowledge the inherent religion in being a minister and saying that there is a difference and we can cut them some slack, then fine, minister have to play too. Zero religious exemptions. Is that less hypocritical enough? Happy now?

Yeah, because that's not against the constitution or anything.

Nobody Just Nobody · Rib-it! Rrrib-it!

Ohfour wrote:
Maybe they had a church at one time and no longer do. So they officiate weddings and other ceremonies. I know A LOT of ordained ministers that don't have a church. I work with 4...

The minister who married DH and I didn't have a church. They ran a B&B and specifically offered wedding packages. It was a family business. Father did the weddings, mom worked the kitchen, and daughter booked and arranged weddings. He didn't have a "church home". He only did weddings.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

I guess you do learn something new every day...

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
And if you are going to call it hypocriticalto aacknowledge the inherent religion in being a minister and saying that there is a difference and we can cut them some slack, then fine, minister have to play too. Zero religious exemptions. Is that less hypocritical enough? Happy now?

So religious discrimination doesn't matter. People like you are the reason this country was founded - the settlers had to flee from religious persecution.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
InsistOhfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........
I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.
But, since you need the obvious pointed out. . .
Ministers are generally affiliated with specific churches or branches of christiianity. Many with very specific rules about who they will or will not marry already. A minister is generLly religious by default, and since theire religion is part and parcel of their job, they have an actual leg to stand on when citing religious objections.
Bakeries are not religious. Neither are cakes.
Why you needed that spellled out is beyond me. It is fairly self explanitory. . .
No, it's totally hypocritical (but I expect no less). If a minister is being PAID, same as a bakery, then I would think the same rules would apply. And Christians DO feel that their religion is part and parcel to their LIVE, not just their jobs. Not all ministers are affiliated with a church. In fact, I would wager that MOST ordained ministers are NOT affiliated with a church.
This confuses me. Why be a minister in the first place?
flan

Because they feel called by God to study and teach.

Some people have absolutely no understanding of faith.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.

This attitude is why I don't really care what the other side has to say. It's rude and filled with hatred. So don't patronize ME and tell ME you know all about love and touchy feely goodness when this is how you "debate" with people who don't agree with you. If you are standing there saying that the other side is fvcking stupid I'm not sure why you think they're going to care about what YOU think. And I think you're delusional if you think that attitude is going to win people over.

Exactly. They stand there and scream "HATE!" when they are the ones actually filled with hate and go out targeting people. But, what do you expect? They condone sinful behavior and expect everyone to fall in line with it.

To Christians, and most other religions, homosexuality is a sin. That is NOT going to change. And quite frankly, people's sins should really be none of my business. But when they want to force me to participate in the celebration of their sinful union - they force it to be my business.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.

It's not discriminating at will - it's refusing to participate in the celebration of SIN. The ones discriminating are the homosexuals who have no respect whatsoever for the religious beliefs of others and want to FORCE people to serve them. FREEDOM means not having to serve at a travesty of a wedding.

chef · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
It's not discriminating at will - it's refusing to participate in the celebration of SIN. The ones discriminating are the homosexuals who have no respect whatsoever for the religious beliefs of others and want to FORCE people to serve them. FREEDOM means not having to serve at a travesty of a wedding.

Thank you, LL.

Also, the Constitution does not say freedom of religion except (fill in the blank). The freedom of religion phrasing does, however, include the statement that there will be no laws prohibiting the free exercise of one's religion. I'd have to Google for the exact phrasing, which I'm not doing right now.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Apparently we are all indentured servants of the State.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
InsistOhfour wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Freedom of religion does not mean discriminate at will.
It means you can be or not be whatever religion you want without fear, it means you can openly advertise your faith, it means you can distribute Bibles on street corners and sing hymns on buses. That is freedom of religion, and it is wonderful
Don't bastardize it and make it an ugly thing.
So what's the difference between a baker and a minister. waiting..........
I already answered this. And it is still a f#cking stupid question.
But, since you need the obvious pointed out. . .
Ministers are generally affiliated with specific churches or branches of christiianity. Many with very specific rules about who they will or will not marry already. A minister is generLly religious by default, and since theire religion is part and parcel of their job, they have an actual leg to stand on when citing religious objections.
Bakeries are not religious. Neither are cakes.
Why you needed that spellled out is beyond me. It is fairly self explanitory. . .
No, it's totally hypocritical (but I expect no less). If a minister is being PAID, same as a bakery, then I would think the same rules would apply. And Christians DO feel that their religion is part and parcel to their LIVE, not just their jobs. Not all ministers are affiliated with a church. In fact, I would wager that MOST ordained ministers are NOT affiliated with a church.
This confuses me. Why be a minister in the first place?
flan
Because they feel called by God to study and teach.

Some people have absolutely no understanding of faith.

Neither, apparently, do I understand the Quaker way of life.

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Saying "People are getting sick and tired of you using religion as a way to discriminate against gays and lesbians, and you may no longer do that, but must treat everyone fairly regardless of sexual orientation." is a very, very long ways away from saying "You must convert to another faith or be an athiest because being a Christian is now illegal, now stand aside as we demolish your place of worship."
This article is pure BS, designed to stir up trouble.
I am all for freedom of religion, but I am so sick and tired of people using their religion--any religion--to treat others poorly. What is the point? If your religion inspires you to be a kind person, a loving person, and it gives you hope and peace, then you do your religion right, and good for you! If it makes you nasty and judgmental, then no, you are doing your religion wrong, and
I have an aunt and uncle that are Catholic. They run their own business, and in the winter they sell garlands and wreaths and the like. Sometimes I help out. This last year they had a sizable order from a lesbian couple in town that were having an anniversary party just before Christmas. My aunt and uncle never considered turning them away for being gay. They are the kindest, most welcoming people I know, and they and their children do religion right.
In my opinion, most of the people on this board are failing at religion. It is a sad statement on the state of the world that the nice, kind, and wise people I know IRL are evenly split between Christians and athiests, but all of the nasty and judgmental ones are Christians.

Who on earth are YOU to tell someone they are doing their religion wrong? This is the problem with atheists. And that last line? Same thing for atheists - I have never seen as much hate and anger towards Christians as I see on message boards. It's highly disturbing.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Mind you - it's not the Christians that started the frivolous lawsuits.

ed11563 · Guru

Why do people assume that people are having sex together just because they are married (or getting married)?

Why is MARRYING a sin?

burns07 · Guru

It is a sad statement on the state of the world that the nice, kind, and wise people I know IRL are evenly split between Christians and athiests, but all of the nasty and judgmental ones are Christians.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

you obviously don't know many ( if any ) homosexual " activists "--believe me, they are considerably more judgmental than any Christians OR athiests you're likely to meet

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

ed11563 wrote:
Why do people assume that people are having sex together just because they are married (or getting married)?
Why is MARRYING a sin?

That is a joke, right?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
Dona Worry Be Happy wrote:
Saying "People are getting sick and tired of you using religion as a way to discriminate against gays and lesbians, and you may no longer do that, but must treat everyone fairly regardless of sexual orientation." is a very, very long ways away from saying "You must convert to another faith or be an athiest because being a Christian is now illegal, now stand aside as we demolish your place of worship."
This article is pure BS, designed to stir up trouble.
I am all for freedom of religion, but I am so sick and tired of people using their religion--any religion--to treat others poorly. What is the point? If your religion inspires you to be a kind person, a loving person, and it gives you hope and peace, then you do your religion right, and good for you! If it makes you nasty and judgmental, then no, you are doing your religion wrong, and
I have an aunt and uncle that are Catholic. They run their own business, and in the winter they sell garlands and wreaths and the like. Sometimes I help out. This last year they had a sizable order from a lesbian couple in town that were having an anniversary party just before Christmas. My aunt and uncle never considered turning them away for being gay. They are the kindest, most welcoming people I know, and they and their children do religion right.
In my opinion, most of the people on this board are failing at religion. It is a sad statement on the state of the world that the nice, kind, and wise people I know IRL are evenly split between Christians and athiests, but all of the nasty and judgmental ones are Christians.
Who on earth are YOU to tell someone they are doing their religion wrong? This is the problem with atheists. And that last line? Same thing for atheists - I have never seen as much hate and anger towards Christians as I see on message boards. It's highly disturbing.

Because she is recounting her EXPERIENCES, which is what we all do.

I don't "hate" Christians, either here or IRL, but I don't have much patience with hypocrisy or judgmental, holier than thou types.

flan