TOTALLY GEEKED!

Tinydancer · Guru

RE: Hours After Gay Marriage Ruling, Politico Op-Ed Calls for Legalized Polygamy

chillepeppa · Regular

Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
The argument against same-sex marriage has never changed or wavered. It is a sin. That doesn't change nor is that wobbly.

What is truly sad is that for the first time, our nations laws go directly against God's. That creates a problem and makes society weaker.

Christians now have to face choosing between God's law and man's. And God's must prevail.
That is fine and dandy... for you. You get to make these decisions for you and your family, but that is where it stops.
You cannot prevent your neighbour from not adhering to your God's laws, because they also have religious freedom. You can witness to them, but that is about it.
Can you clarify the bolded for me?
Certainly. As more and more sexual immorality has become accepted, society has gotten worse. We have single mothers who have to support their children on their own and more and more families without fathers. Children need both a mother and a father - as that changes, so too does society, and not for the better. We have more welfare and more crime.
And as society continues to accept new immoralities as normal, acceptable, and even good, that will get worse.
As long as war is a societal norm, so are single mothers.
But sexual immorality (I assume this would be promiscuity, prostitution and homosexuality) are not new to society by any means. Open acknowledgement of it, yes, maybe that is new, but these things have been happening since we figured out how to do them.
But this now brings me to another question. If you base your idea of a strong community/society on its morality, and you base your idea of proper morality on your religion, where does that leave freedom of religion for everyone else in society?
The government doesn't belong in people's private religious beliefs. We have general laws that are based upon morality as defined by religions throughout the ages - many of those meld together. Thou shalt not kill, steal, bear false witness - all mesh with religion. The law doesn't say anything about eating meat on Friday, or praying everyday at 4:00 except that people must be given reasonable accomodation to practice those freedoms. I do not think the law should interfere in ANY religious beliefs beyond making sure those beliefs don't hurt others - ie - no human sacrifices or killing other people.
And before this - there was no LAW that directly contradicted a basic belief of every major religion. The problem here is that the law is now condoning and enabling what clearly goes against people's religious beliefs.
And in THIS country, religious freedom is a fundamental right. So, now you have rights against rights.
And quite frankly, the "slippery slope" that people spoke of has happened right on this board. First - it was that nobody would make Christians participate in same-sex weddings, and then they were sued over refusing to participate. Then it changed to it is discrimination not to participate regardless of beliefs - a business person should leave their religious convictions at home. Religious convictions can't be "left at home". People DIE for their religious beliefs. And it seems very clear that people without religious beliefs have no interest in respecting them.

Thing is, you can still maintain your beliefs regarding this law without breaking a law, civil or religious. You just cannot enforce your religious belief regarding this law unto others.

I respect your right to have your beliefs, I have clearly stated this several times. I question to understand. It might seem disrespectful, that is not my intent.

One also have to be careful of judging a whole group of people by the actions of a few. Yes, there are those who are trying to force churches to do these things, but they are by far still a very small minority. All groups have their stupid minority, this would be them for the homosexualsource as far as I'm concerned. They are crappy people any day of the week, not just the gay ones.

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

Except that what they do puts people out of business - ruins their careers - and creates PRECEDENT which affects everyone. What do the Christians DO to them besides refuse to take part in their relationship?

FNW · Guru

I'll agree with that last statement, Chille. But sadly, the minority of those problem individuals, regardless of orientation, are interfering with our religious practices.

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

That very small minority seems to be growing at a rapid pace.

FNW · Guru

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
That very small minority seems to be growing at a rapid pace.

Sure is. Lest you be labeled as discrimination.

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

FNW wrote:
Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
That very small minority seems to be growing at a rapid pace.
Sure is. Lest you be labeled as discrimination.

And they only target Christians.

chillepeppa · Regular

Lawyerlady wrote:
Except that what they do puts people out of business - ruins their careers - and creates PRECEDENT which affects everyone. What do the Christians DO to them besides refuse to take part in their relationship?

Again, painting a whole group as bad for the actions of a few. Unfortunately, people like Pat Robertson and Pastor Steven Anderson makes Christians easy targets for theses tactics too.

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

We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!

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

Not one person on this board who supports gay marriage has ever expressed support for the Christians who were sued for refusing to service those weddings. Not ONCE. There is always the - "but it's discrimination" argument. Yes, it is. It's discrimination against religious beliefs.

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Monday 29th of June 2015 02:49:27 PM

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!

Threads like this make me sad.

Who respects their rights? Maybe they feel the only way is to shine a light on businesses who refuse to serve certain customers.

flan

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

Yes, because every time a lawsuit that comes out in which the people are claiming they got bloated and had loss of appetites and headaches AFTER work because they didn't get a wedding cake does not make me think they are wanting to "shine a light" on anything. They want money.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Yes, because every time a lawsuit that comes out in which the people are claiming they got bloated and had loss of appetites and headaches AFTER work because they didn't get a wedding cake does not make me think they are wanting to "shine a light" on anything. They want money.

That was ONE lawsuit.

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

We've had three different threads about bakers being sued so I'm not sure where you got "ONE" lawsuit.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

And here it is...
Who respects their rights? Maybe they feel the only way is to shine a light on businesses who refuse to serve certain customers.
flan

....that is the crux of the matter.

Which one has more right?

Only ONE is protected by the Constitution.

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

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
Yes, because every time a lawsuit that comes out in which the people are claiming they got bloated and had loss of appetites and headaches AFTER work because they didn't get a wedding cake does not make me think they are wanting to "shine a light" on anything. They want money.

I know - having to go to another baker must have been life shattering. Maybe even as much as having to go bankrupt to defend your religious beliefs. evileye

chillepeppa · Regular

Lawyerlady wrote:
Not one person on this board who supports gay marriage has ever expressed support for the Christians who were sued for refusing to service those weddings. Not ONCE. There is always the - "but it's discrimination" argument. Yes, it is. It's discrimination against religious beliefs.

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Monday 29th of June 2015 02:49:27 PM

This is not true. I've have stated my feelings on this time and again and not in favour of the aggressor.

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

chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Not one person on this board who supports gay marriage has ever expressed support for the Christians who were sued for refusing to service those weddings. Not ONCE. There is always the - "but it's discrimination" argument. Yes, it is. It's discrimination against religious beliefs.

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Monday 29th of June 2015 02:49:27 PM
This is not true. I've have stated my feelings on this time and again and not in favour of the aggressor.

So you are saying you never said that the bakers and photographers should have to serve the same sex weddings?

chillepeppa · Regular

Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!

The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!
The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.

And they are likely baking cakes for adulterers & pedophiles...but that's fine & dandy...

flan

Lexxy · My dog name is Sasha, too!

Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Not one person on this board who supports gay marriage has ever expressed support for the Christians who were sued for refusing to service those weddings. Not ONCE. There is always the - "but it's discrimination" argument. Yes, it is. It's discrimination against religious beliefs.

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Monday 29th of June 2015 02:49:27 PM
This is not true. I've have stated my feelings on this time and again and not in favour of the aggressor.
So you are saying you never said that the bakers and photographers should have to serve the same sex weddings?

I'm fairly certain I never have. I say as small business owners it is their right to not serve them. I honestly don't understand why they would try to force someone to prepare their cake or photos who's heart isn't in it. There has got to be another bakery in town. On the other hand I think it is a foolish business practice & does leave them open for a discrimination suit. It is in fact discrimination on their part. It is their choice not to serve them but then it is the couple's choice how to proceed. A rational couple will respect the religious values & move on to another baker. Sadly not everyone is rational.

It is no different than if I went to a Catholic, Muslim or Buddhist church & wanted them to perform my wedding. I pretty sure they would turn me away since I'm not a member or practice their religion.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Known vs unknown.

In response to Flan.

-- Edited by lilyofcourse on Monday 29th of June 2015 04:55:16 PM

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

Lexxy wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Not one person on this board who supports gay marriage has ever expressed support for the Christians who were sued for refusing to service those weddings. Not ONCE. There is always the - "but it's discrimination" argument. Yes, it is. It's discrimination against religious beliefs.

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Monday 29th of June 2015 02:49:27 PM
This is not true. I've have stated my feelings on this time and again and not in favour of the aggressor.
So you are saying you never said that the bakers and photographers should have to serve the same sex weddings?
I'm fairly certain I never have. I say as small business owners it is their right to not serve them. I honestly don't understand why they would try to force someone to prepare their cake or photos who's heart isn't in it. There has got to be another bakery in town. On the other hand I think it is a foolish business practice & does leave them open for a discrimination suit. It is in fact discrimination on their part. It is their choice not to serve them but then it is the couple's choice how to proceed. A rational couple will respect the religious values & move on to another baker. Sadly not everyone is rational.
It is no different than if I went to a Catholic, Muslim or Buddhist church & wanted them to perform my wedding. I pretty sure they would turn me away since I'm not a member or practice their religion.

This is the problem - it should not be treated as discrimination and even if it is, it should be exempt due to religious freedoms. To say they shouldn't have to, but if they don't, they can still be sued is contradictory.

burns07 · Guru

I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
___________________________________________________

actually, it doesn't--homosexuality has been looked upon as a deviant condition, a sickness--something abhorred and condemned ( definitely not condoned / promulgated ) by civilizations world-wide for at least the last 10,000 years--it is a condition abhorrent to the overwhelming majority of HUMANS on this planet ( not just Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintos, etc. )--to me, the natural revulsion exceeds the moral objections to the practice for the HUMAN revulsion is near universal--so to me, this decision not only prevents my religious objections to having it shoved in my face but equally ( perhaps even more importantly ) prohibits my objections as a HUMAN--how, in a country founded on the concept of individual liberty, can this be a fair and righteous decision ? ( as of course it is not and cannot be viz the dissent opinions )

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

chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!
The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.

How is not baking a cake forcing the Bible on someone? They didn't go out and seek the homosexuals - it was the other way around. Believe it or not, Christians don't go around hunting down sinners - ain't nobody got time for that.

Lexxy · My dog name is Sasha, too!

LL, I'm fine with them being exempt due to religious freedom. But the law needs to be changed to reflect that.

chillepeppa · Regular

Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!
The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
How is not baking a cake forcing the Bible on someone? They didn't go out and seek the homosexuals - it was the other way around. Believe it or not, Christians don't go around hunting down sinners - ain't nobody got time for that.

When I said forcing the bible, I was not thinking of not baking cakes, more like Westboro type antics.

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

Lexxy wrote:
LL, I'm fine with them being exempt due to religious freedom. But the law needs to be changed to reflect that.

The law needs to be ENFORCED to reflect that. The Constitution already provides for it - the Courts just need to follow it.

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

chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!
The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
How is not baking a cake forcing the Bible on someone? They didn't go out and seek the homosexuals - it was the other way around. Believe it or not, Christians don't go around hunting down sinners - ain't nobody got time for that.
When I said forcing the bible, I was not thinking of not baking cakes, more like Westboro type antics.

Ok - those are crazy nuts. But even being crazy nuts - how are they forcing homosexuals to do anything?

chillepeppa · Regular

Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Not one person on this board who supports gay marriage has ever expressed support for the Christians who were sued for refusing to service those weddings. Not ONCE. There is always the - "but it's discrimination" argument. Yes, it is. It's discrimination against religious beliefs.

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Monday 29th of June 2015 02:49:27 PM
This is not true. I've have stated my feelings on this time and again and not in favour of the aggressor.
So you are saying you never said that the bakers and photographers should have to serve the same sex weddings?

During my anti-theist days, I said a lot of stupid things. Recently however, not so much. I'd like to think I've realised we're all just moving forward to the beating of our own drums. And just because I can't hear yours doesn't mean is not there or wrong, it's just yours. I have my own.

So no, I'm not saying I've never said it. But I'm not saying it now.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

burns07 wrote:

I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
___________________________________________________

actually, it doesn't--homosexuality has been looked upon as a deviant condition, a sickness--something abhorred and condemned ( definitely not condoned / promulgated ) by civilizations world-wide for at least the last 10,000 years--it is a condition abhorrent to the overwhelming majority of HUMANS on this planet ( not just Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintos, etc. )--to me, the natural revulsion exceeds the moral objections to the practice for the HUMAN revulsion is near universal--so to me, this decision not only prevents my religious objections to having it shoved in my face but equally ( perhaps even more importantly ) prohibits my objections as a HUMAN--how, in a country founded on the concept of individual liberty, can this be a fair and righteous decision ? ( as of course it is not and cannot be viz the dissent opinions )

I would be tempted to feel sorry for you, but you're just too nasty.

WHY would you be REVULSED by homosexuality? HOW IN THE WORLD DOES IT IMPACT YOUR LIFE?

flan

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

flan327 wrote:
burns07 wrote:

I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
___________________________________________________

actually, it doesn't--homosexuality has been looked upon as a deviant condition, a sickness--something abhorred and condemned ( definitely not condoned / promulgated ) by civilizations world-wide for at least the last 10,000 years--it is a condition abhorrent to the overwhelming majority of HUMANS on this planet ( not just Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintos, etc. )--to me, the natural revulsion exceeds the moral objections to the practice for the HUMAN revulsion is near universal--so to me, this decision not only prevents my religious objections to having it shoved in my face but equally ( perhaps even more importantly ) prohibits my objections as a HUMAN--how, in a country founded on the concept of individual liberty, can this be a fair and righteous decision ? ( as of course it is not and cannot be viz the dissent opinions )

I would be tempted to feel sorry for you, but you're just too nasty.
WHY would you be REVULSED by homosexuality? HOW IN THE WORLD DOES IT IMPACT YOUR LIFE?
flan

Good grief, flan. God condemns homosexuality. I also am repulsed by the act, even the thought of it makes me feel creepy.

Am I repulsed by the person who is a homosexual? No.

But, I sure am by the thought of the act.

ETA: The "act" is being shoved down our throats daily now.

-- Edited by just Czech on Monday 29th of June 2015 05:36:12 PM

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

just Czech wrote:
flan327 wrote:
burns07 wrote:

I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
___________________________________________________

actually, it doesn't--homosexuality has been looked upon as a deviant condition, a sickness--something abhorred and condemned ( definitely not condoned / promulgated ) by civilizations world-wide for at least the last 10,000 years--it is a condition abhorrent to the overwhelming majority of HUMANS on this planet ( not just Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintos, etc. )--to me, the natural revulsion exceeds the moral objections to the practice for the HUMAN revulsion is near universal--so to me, this decision not only prevents my religious objections to having it shoved in my face but equally ( perhaps even more importantly ) prohibits my objections as a HUMAN--how, in a country founded on the concept of individual liberty, can this be a fair and righteous decision ? ( as of course it is not and cannot be viz the dissent opinions )

I would be tempted to feel sorry for you, but you're just too nasty.
WHY would you be REVULSED by homosexuality? HOW IN THE WORLD DOES IT IMPACT YOUR LIFE?
flan
Good grief, flan. God condemns homosexuality. I also am repulsed by the act, even the thought of it makes me feel creepy.
Am I repulsed by the person who is a homosexual? No.
But, I sure am by the thought of the act.
ETA: The "act" is being shoved down our throats daily now.

-- Edited by just Czech on Monday 29th of June 2015 05:36:12 PM

Yeah, I don't want to argue with you.

Love is love, between consenting adults.

flan

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

flan327 wrote:
just Czech wrote:
flan327 wrote:
burns07 wrote:

I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
___________________________________________________

actually, it doesn't--homosexuality has been looked upon as a deviant condition, a sickness--something abhorred and condemned ( definitely not condoned / promulgated ) by civilizations world-wide for at least the last 10,000 years--it is a condition abhorrent to the overwhelming majority of HUMANS on this planet ( not just Jews, Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Shintos, etc. )--to me, the natural revulsion exceeds the moral objections to the practice for the HUMAN revulsion is near universal--so to me, this decision not only prevents my religious objections to having it shoved in my face but equally ( perhaps even more importantly ) prohibits my objections as a HUMAN--how, in a country founded on the concept of individual liberty, can this be a fair and righteous decision ? ( as of course it is not and cannot be viz the dissent opinions )

I would be tempted to feel sorry for you, but you're just too nasty.
WHY would you be REVULSED by homosexuality? HOW IN THE WORLD DOES IT IMPACT YOUR LIFE?
flan
Good grief, flan. God condemns homosexuality. I also am repulsed by the act, even the thought of it makes me feel creepy.
Am I repulsed by the person who is a homosexual? No.
But, I sure am by the thought of the act.
ETA: The "act" is being shoved down our throats daily now.

-- Edited by just Czech on Monday 29th of June 2015 05:36:12 PM
Yeah, I don't want to argue with you.
Love is love, between consenting adults.
flan

It is not love, IMHO.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

What is it then?

Depravity?

Again I ask, WHY did your god create homosexuals?

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:
What is it then?

Depravity?

Again I ask, WHY did your god create homosexuals?

flan

That's a ridiculous question. Did God "create" Sin flan? God created murderers and pedophiles and drug addicts and on and on. That's just an absurd comment.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:
What is it then?

Depravity?

Again I ask, WHY did your god create homosexuals?

flan
That's a ridiculous question. Did God "create" Sin flan? God created murderers and pedophiles and drug addicts and on and on. That's just an absurd comment.

Murderers and pedophiles HURT other people. Who do homosexuals HURT?

flan

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:
What is it then?

Depravity?

Again I ask, WHY did your god create homosexuals?

flan
That's a ridiculous question. Did God "create" Sin flan? God created murderers and pedophiles and drug addicts and on and on. That's just an absurd comment.
Murderers and pedophiles HURT other people. Who do homosexuals HURT?
flan

By making people believe sin isn't sin.

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

flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:
What is it then?

Depravity?

Again I ask, WHY did your god create homosexuals?

flan
That's a ridiculous question. Did God "create" Sin flan? God created murderers and pedophiles and drug addicts and on and on. That's just an absurd comment.
Murderers and pedophiles HURT other people. Who do homosexuals HURT?
flan

Who do Christians HURT?

But there are other kinds of HURT and homosexuals who sue Christians hurt them way worse than a Christian refusing to celebrate their wedding. They hurt them financially, they hurt them by stealing the time it takes to deal with a lawsuit. They hurt them because they are selfish people who "want" what they want and what other people want be damned.

WYSIWYG · Guru

Christians now have to face choosing between God's law and man's. And God's must prevail. - Lawyerlady

__________________________________

I disagree, to a point. As long as homosexuals don't force religious people to have marriage ceremonies in their churches, I don't see the connection between as you say "choosing between God's law and man's". That point would be crossed, however, any time someone wants to force a church to perform a gay marriage.

There's a saying I have seen bandied about on the internet over the last few years "Don't believe in gay marriage? Don't get gay married."

If we let others do as others will do, it's not choosing man's law over God's. It's only if we participate in the actual activities allowed in the conflicted law that we do so.

And don't get me started on the bakery incident. God's law doesn't include cake.

WYSIWYG · Guru

But the LAW guarantees religious freedom, which all y'all continually ignore. - Lawyerlady

______________________________

How is it religious freedom though if others of different beliefs from me aren't welcome to have their beliefs? When the religious beliefs of any are made illegal, then the religious beliefs of all are in danger, because what happens once precedent is set that religious beliefs can be legislated and the dominant religion changes?

I am personally against gay marriage for myself. I understand that it is a sin against God, as stated in my Bible. But if others believe differently, I feel that religious freedom demands that they be allowed to follow their beliefs.

burns07 · Guru

If we let others do as others will do, it's not choosing man's law over God's. It's only if we participate in the actual activities allowed in the conflicted law that we do so.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

lord--are you really too dense to comprehend that homosexuals sued christians because they ( christians ) DECLINED to participate / abet a practice they ( christians ) considered immoral / repugnant ? are you really too stupid to see that homosexuals threatened / sued christians because they ( christians ) were exercising their constitutionally protected rights in following their morals / consciences ?

homosexuals want to persecute christians when they ( christians ) REFUSE to participate

WYSIWYG · Guru

burns07, I am smart enough to understand that as a Christian I can choose to not bake wedding cakes if that means I will legally have to provide them to gay weddings. I can therefore follow both man's law and God's law at the same time.

WYSIWYG · Guru

I should have also mentioned that I am smart enough and well versed enough in my Bible to know that the Bible allows me to participate in pagan or other non-Christian celebrations, as long as I don't partake of any sacrificial food.

burns07 · Guru

I can choose to not bake wedding cakes if that means I will legally have to provide them to gay weddings.
_________________________________________________________________________________

but what if wedding cakes is your mainstay as a baker ? what if you're a wedding photographer ? a limousine service ? a pizza restaurant ? a clothing rental establishment ? a stationer ? a caterer ? an entertainer ? an equipment rental firm ? a travel agent ? a hotel ? a resort ?

these are the types of firms ( along with many others ) that have been threatened and sued by homosexuals because their owners / proprietors / operators objected to homosexual unions on moral / religious grounds

so the alternatives for these folks are: approve of homosexuality or be sued or forced into bankruptcy ( and with the government's blessing )

personally wish they had never outlawed duelling--would love to settle this kind on nonsense on the spot, permanently--and go back to the store

-- Edited by burns07 on Tuesday 30th of June 2015 12:03:29 AM

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I don't think a person should ever be made to do anything against their will or beliefs.

chillepeppa · Regular

Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!
The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
How is not baking a cake forcing the Bible on someone? They didn't go out and seek the homosexuals - it was the other way around. Believe it or not, Christians don't go around hunting down sinners - ain't nobody got time for that.
When I said forcing the bible, I was not thinking of not baking cakes, more like Westboro type antics.
Ok - those are crazy nuts. But even being crazy nuts - how are they forcing homosexuals to do anything?

Crazy nuts they may be, but in the case of Pastor Anderson, he is advocating violence. He is preaching death for homosexual. I struggle to see how his congregation reconcile themselves with that and the law of the land.

And in Africa (yes, not in America, but still) those threats have been followed through on for religious reasons. In the East too.

chillepeppa · Regular

lilyofcourse wrote:
I don't think a person should ever be made to do anything against their will or beliefs.

I agree with this. But then all beliefs and wills should be considered equally. Even the Muslims...

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

chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!
The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
How is not baking a cake forcing the Bible on someone? They didn't go out and seek the homosexuals - it was the other way around. Believe it or not, Christians don't go around hunting down sinners - ain't nobody got time for that.
When I said forcing the bible, I was not thinking of not baking cakes, more like Westboro type antics.
Ok - those are crazy nuts. But even being crazy nuts - how are they forcing homosexuals to do anything?
Crazy nuts they may be, but in the case of Pastor Anderson, he is advocating violence. He is preaching death for homosexual. I struggle to see how his congregation reconcile themselves with that and the law of the land.
And in Africa (yes, not in America, but still) those threats have been followed through on for religious reasons. In the East too.

After the ruling I saw, way more than I ever thought possible, gay people preaching for the deaths of any known Christians.

chillepeppa · Regular

Nobody Just Nobody wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
chillepeppa wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
We've had lawsuits against churches, photographers and bakers who did not want to participate in a same sex wedding.

When you have 2 groups with rights - why does one trump the other? Why can a gay couple FORCE a Christian photographer to shoot their wedding or else sue them to put them out of business? Who does that? Mean, nasty people who have no respect for the rights of others, that's who.

And people will say - oh, that's the minority of homosexuals - but then they argue against the Christians when it happens!
The minute one tries to interfere with the other's way, be it to force the cupcakes or to force the bible, one could be seen as nasty. I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are standing.
How is not baking a cake forcing the Bible on someone? They didn't go out and seek the homosexuals - it was the other way around. Believe it or not, Christians don't go around hunting down sinners - ain't nobody got time for that.
When I said forcing the bible, I was not thinking of not baking cakes, more like Westboro type antics.
Ok - those are crazy nuts. But even being crazy nuts - how are they forcing homosexuals to do anything?
Crazy nuts they may be, but in the case of Pastor Anderson, he is advocating violence. He is preaching death for homosexual. I struggle to see how his congregation reconcile themselves with that and the law of the land.
And in Africa (yes, not in America, but still) those threats have been followed through on for religious reasons. In the East too.
After the ruling I saw, way more than I ever thought possible, gay people preaching for the deaths of any known Christians.

Can you post some of them here? I'd like to see some of those as well.