TOTALLY GEEKED!

Tinydancer · Guru

RE: Why the Left Loathes Western Civilization

Ohfour · Hooker

huskerbb wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
BS. maybe not the actual deed, but you are participating.

if you buy a teenager booze, you are participating in him and his pals getting drunk even if you don't drink it.
- huskerbb

_____________________________

That's only participatory because they couldn't otherwise have the booze if you hadn't provided it.

Can a homosexual couple have homosexual sex if you don't provide them a cake? It's my guess that they could still do it. So providing the cake in no way creates an ability to have homosexual sex.
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.
Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.

Yep!!!!!!

WYSIWYG · Guru

So it's ok to willingly help a bank robber?

No. Its call accessory.

When helping to facilitate a wedding between homosexuals, you are an accessory to the sin.

We are to set ourselves apart from sin. Shine a light on sin and not make sin ok.
- lilyofcourse

________________________________

Where the heck did I say it was ok to help a bank robber? I never even remotely approved of or suggested that. What I said was that being a lookout was being an accessory to the active bank robbery. Because without the lookout they wouldn't have been able to successfully rob the bank assuming that they were successful, of course).

Baking a cake is not helping facilitate anything between homosexuals - except the consumption of the cake you baked.

I do agree with your last line though. Unfortunately, not baking a cake doesn't do that. Not baking a cake, if baking cakes is your profession, makes you guilty of Pride (in a "you want my product, but you are unworthy" way).

WYSIWYG · Guru

Now you are splitting hairs to justify your ridiculous position.

You are absolutely participating. It's a gay wedding--that in and of itself is a sin--not just the sex act.
- huskerbb

_________________________________

It's a wedding strictly in the secular sense though. It's not a church sanctioned, promised to God, union.

They can have all the weddings they want that the law wants to recognize. God won't recognize those He doesn't approve of.

WYSIWYG · Guru

They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.

And afterwards, the new couple is going to go home and knit!

It isn't that you can't see, it's that you wont.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.

A secular wedding between a man and a woman. A wedding between homosexuals is sinful.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
Now you are splitting hairs to justify your ridiculous position.

You are absolutely participating. It's a gay wedding--that in and of itself is a sin--not just the sex act.
- huskerbb

_________________________________

It's a wedding strictly in the secular sense though. It's not a church sanctioned, promised to God, union.

They can have all the weddings they want that the law wants to recognize. God won't recognize those He doesn't approve of.

That is BS. A wedding is a wedding is a wedding. Using your ridiculous theory, since it's "legal" and not in a church--then abortion isn't sinful, either. Absurd.

apple · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.

Its just a wedding.

Ohfour · Hooker

apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...

apple · Guru

Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...

Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.

To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.

Ohfour · Hooker

apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.

And to me, it forces me to participate in something I consider a sin. People should not be made to do something that is against thousands of years old tenet of their religion...

Tinydancer · Guru

You don't get to decide for me what's sinful and what isn't. As a Christian gay marriage and gay sex are sinful. Let them go get their cake from someone who doesn't think what they're doing is a sin. I shouldn't be FORCED to do it anymore than they should be forced to give up their sinning. They can certainly still get married and they can still get a cake. Just not from me and if they forced me you can bet they really don't want to be eating that cake...

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.

And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.

apple · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.

? why? Because discrimination is okay?

Tinydancer · Guru

It's not discrimination unless you mean against the business owner who's not allowed to run his business as he sees fit.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?

It's peachy keen as long as a Christian is doing it.

flan

apple · Guru

flan327 wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?
It's peachy keen as long as a Christian is doing it.
flan

Right... Imagine if ALL RELIGIONS could discriminate against everyone based on all their differing beliefs. Nutty.

Tinydancer · Guru

Except it's the Christian being forced to go against their religion so why isn't that discriminating against Christian. It's my right not to participate in sin. It's their right to get married. I am not stopping them in any way. Only refusing to bake them a cake that they can get in many other places.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?

It isn't discrimination of the person.

It's the freedom of religion.

apple · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?
It isn't discrimination of the person.
It's the freedom of religion.

Not when the freedom of religion attempts to negate the legal freedom of others.

I don't know why a gay couple would want to have someone preside over their wedding against their will. I suppose it does happen but not very often.

If you are in the business of presiding over weddings, I suppose you must adhere to the laws of the land.

Ohfour · Hooker

apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?
It isn't discrimination of the person.
It's the freedom of religion.

Not when the freedom of religion attempts to negate the legal freedom of others.
I don't know why a gay couple would want to have someone preside over their wedding against their will. I suppose it does happen but not very often.
If you are in the business of presiding over weddings, I suppose you must adhere to the laws of the land.

Thankfully not if you are an ordained minister...

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?
It isn't discrimination of the person.
It's the freedom of religion.

Not when the freedom of religion attempts to negate the legal freedom of others.
I don't know why a gay couple would want to have someone preside over their wedding against their will. I suppose it does happen but not very often.
If you are in the business of presiding over weddings, I suppose you must adhere to the laws of the land.

What legal freedom? Purchasing a cake, having pictures made, flowers?

They are totally free to have those things. No one is denying that privilege.

They may have to find someone else to provide these services, but it isn't illegal for them to have them.

But what you are talking about is forcing a private business owner to violate their constitutional RIGHT to practice their religion.

Right vs privilege.

I really don't know why that is so hard to understand.

apple · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?
It isn't discrimination of the person.
It's the freedom of religion.

Not when the freedom of religion attempts to negate the legal freedom of others.
I don't know why a gay couple would want to have someone preside over their wedding against their will. I suppose it does happen but not very often.
If you are in the business of presiding over weddings, I suppose you must adhere to the laws of the land.
What legal freedom? Purchasing a cake, having pictures made, flowers?
They are totally free to have those things. No one is denying that privilege.
They may have to find someone else to provide these services, but it isn't illegal for them to have them.
But what you are talking about is forcing a private business owner to violate their constitutional RIGHT to practice their religion.
Right vs privilege.
I really don't know why that is so hard to understand.

Its not hard to understand lily. You want your religion to have total freedom to discriminate. I don't believe that is okay.

We will never agree, it is what it is.

huskerbb · Guru

apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
apple wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
apple wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
They can get the cake from someone else JUST LIKE the kids can get booze from someone else.

Again, the wedding, itself, is a sinful act--not just the physical act of sex.
- huskerbb
___________________________

Now who's the one doing mental gymnastics?

There's nothing illegal, immoral, or even anti-Biblical about homosexuals eating cake. They can have homosexual sex with or without cake. Underage kids can't get drunk without booze. Do you not see how your analogy fails?

Again, a secular wedding unrecognized by the church or God isn't a sinful act. It's just a legal procedure.
Its just a wedding.

A sinful wedding. It's not just the act that's a sin. A gay wedding is also a sin...
Only if you are of a certain religion it is perhaps in your mind, sinful.
To me it is just a wedding. Two people who love each other sharing vows.
And THIS is why the service provider, whatever the service, should be able to refuse without fear of repercussion.
? why? Because discrimination is okay?
It isn't discrimination of the person.
It's the freedom of religion.

Not when the freedom of religion attempts to negate the legal freedom of others.
I don't know why a gay couple would want to have someone preside over their wedding against their will. I suppose it does happen but not very often.
If you are in the business of presiding over weddings, I suppose you must adhere to the laws of the land.
What legal freedom? Purchasing a cake, having pictures made, flowers?
They are totally free to have those things. No one is denying that privilege.
They may have to find someone else to provide these services, but it isn't illegal for them to have them.
But what you are talking about is forcing a private business owner to violate their constitutional RIGHT to practice their religion.
Right vs privilege.
I really don't know why that is so hard to understand.
Its not hard to understand lily. You want your religion to have total freedom to discriminate. I don't believe that is okay.
We will never agree, it is what it is.

And you want to discriminate against people for their beliefs.

WYSIWYG · Guru

And afterwards, the new couple is going to go home and knit!

It isn't that you can't see, it's that you wont.
- lilyofcourse

_________________________

You are wrong. I'd see it if it was there. It's not there.

Allowing legal and secular homosexual weddings and even providing cakes for them doesn't change whether or not homosexuals have homosexual sex. It makes zero difference to the sin that they are committing. That's why "love the sinner, but hate the sin" applies.

If they needed your place to engage in the sinful sex, I'd be right there beside you backing a "they can't borrow my place because what they are doing goes against my beliefs" stance. Because that would be condoning and facilitating the sin. Providing a cake that will change nothing, is neither.

WYSIWYG · Guru

That is BS. A wedding is a wedding is a wedding. Using your ridiculous theory, since it's "legal" and not in a church--then abortion isn't sinful, either. Absurd.
- huskerbb

____________________________________

You are wrong on that "A wedding is a wedding is a wedding." assertion, huskerbb. Not all weddings are the same and not all count to all faiths.

Is the second marriage of a Muslim man, who is still married to his first wife, considered valid in your denomination? It's valid under the marriage laws of Islam.

Is the second marriage of a Christian man or woman that divorced for reasons unrelated to adultery recognized by the Catholic Church? No. Only the first marriage is recognized by them.

And a marriage that's secular in nature does not need to be recognized by Christian churches, even though some denominations do recognize them (off the top of my head I remember not too long ago Presbyterians making mention that they will perform and recognize them. I also believe ELCA Lutherans are allowed to on a congregation-by-congregation basis.).

Abortion has a specific and definite outcome. Always has, always will. I have no qualms about calling abortion sinful.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
That is BS. A wedding is a wedding is a wedding. Using your ridiculous theory, since it's "legal" and not in a church--then abortion isn't sinful, either. Absurd.
- huskerbb

____________________________________

You are wrong on that "A wedding is a wedding is a wedding." assertion, huskerbb. Not all weddings are the same and not all count to all faiths.

Is the second marriage of a Muslim man, who is still married to his first wife, considered valid in your denomination? It's valid under the marriage laws of Islam.

Is the second marriage of a Christian man or woman that divorced for reasons unrelated to adultery recognized by the Catholic Church? No. Only the first marriage is recognized by them.

And a marriage that's secular in nature does not need to be recognized by Christian churches, even though some denominations do recognize them (off the top of my head I remember not too long ago Presbyterians making mention that they will perform and recognize them. I also believe ELCA Lutherans are allowed to on a congregation-by-congregation basis.).

Abortion has a specific and definite outcome. Always has, always will. I have no qualms about calling abortion sinful.

Marriage has a specific and definite outcome, as well. id yiur theory is valid that all marriages are different, then someone should be able to decide if they at want to partiipate, Or not.

you are countering yor own argument. If they can get married regardless of whether or not they have a cake--then IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE whether one person or another makes one, so therefore, they should not be forced to.