A Political and Moral dilemma solved: Homosexuality

[TemplarKormac]

Libertarians stress a philosophy of government

Stop.

I am a libertarian. A "little l" libertarian, and I espouse to the maximization of individual liberty. I am Lockean in nature, that all individuals (not just straights) are granted liberty by natural law. People are free, according to John Locke, to pursue "life, liberty, health and property."

Those individual liberties are IN FACT covered in the Constitution by the Fifth Amendment.

 

[TemplarKormac]

If some KKK members went I to a black owned bakery and asked them to bake a nazi wedding cake, do they have the right to refuse

Yes you do. If you agree to serve the public, you must, even if you find who serve or what products you're asked to make offensive.

Once you agree to serve the public, you can't turn back on that agreement.

 

[Mr.Right]

If some KKK members went I to a black owned bakery and asked them to bake a nazi wedding cake, do they have the right to refuse

Yes you do. If you agree to serve the public, you must, even if you find it who serve or what products you're asked to make as offensive.

Once you agree to serve the public, you can't turn back on that agreement.

What about a Christian photographer asked to take nude photos?

 

[Skylar]

If some KKK members went I to a black owned bakery and asked them to bake a nazi wedding cake, do they have the right to refuse

Yes you do. If you agree to serve the public, you must, even if you find it who serve or what products you're asked to make as offensive.

Once you agree to serve the public, you can't turn back on that agreement.

What about a Christian photographer asked to take nude photos?

If the photographer takes nude photos for his straight customers, he'd have to take them for his gay customers too.

If he doesn't take nude photos for anyone, then he's free and clear.

 

[Mr.Right]

If some KKK members went I to a black owned bakery and asked them to bake a nazi wedding cake, do they have the right to refuse

Yes you do. If you agree to serve the public, you must, even if you find it who serve or what products you're asked to make as offensive.

Once you agree to serve the public, you can't turn back on that agreement.

What about a Christian photographer asked to take nude photos?

If the photographer takes nude photos for his straight customers, he'd have to take them for his gay customers too.

If he doesn't take nude photos for anyone, then he's free and clear.

And the couple who refused to bake a gay wedding cake did not have them on the list of cakes they bake. Are they free and clear too?

 

[TemplarKormac]

What about a Christian photographer asked to take nude photos?

If you are referring to Vanessa Willock, she wasn't asked to take nude photos.

 

[Skylar]

If some KKK members went I to a black owned bakery and asked them to bake a nazi wedding cake, do they have the right to refuse

Yes you do. If you agree to serve the public, you must, even if you find it who serve or what products you're asked to make as offensive.

Once you agree to serve the public, you can't turn back on that agreement.

What about a Christian photographer asked to take nude photos?

If the photographer takes nude photos for his straight customers, he'd have to take them for his gay customers too.

If he doesn't take nude photos for anyone, then he's free and clear.

And the couple who refused to bake a gay wedding cake did not have them on the list of cakes they bake. Are they free and clear too?

There's no such thing as a 'gay' wedding cake. Cake doesn't have a sexual orientation. There's just cake. If you're going to sell cake to a straight couple, you sell it to a gay couple.

 

[Mr.Right]

If some KKK members went I to a black owned bakery and asked them to bake a nazi wedding cake, do they have the right to refuse

Yes you do. If you agree to serve the public, you must, even if you find it who serve or what products you're asked to make as offensive.

Once you agree to serve the public, you can't turn back on that agreement.

What about a Christian photographer asked to take nude photos?

If the photographer takes nude photos for his straight customers, he'd have to take them for his gay customers too.

If he doesn't take nude photos for anyone, then he's free and clear.

And the couple who refused to bake a gay wedding cake did not have them on the list of cakes they bake. Are they free and clear too?

There's no such thing as a 'gay' wedding cake. Cake doesn't have a sexual orientation. There's just cake. If you're going to sell cake to a straight couple, you sell it to a gay couple.

They wanted a gay themed wedding cake. Something that they did not advertise.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And the couple who refused to bake a gay wedding cake did not have them on the list of cakes they bake. Are they free and clear too?

That doesn't matter. Public service means you serve the public. It does not allow you to discriminate between one person or another.

 

[TemplarKormac]

They wanted a gay themed wedding cake. Something that they did not advertise.

So? If a Muslim agrees to serve the public, he has to serve Muslims, Jews and Christians alike. It doesn't matter what he advertises, if he sells things that are of general interest to the public domain, he must serve anyone who wishes to purchase them.

 

[Mr.Right]

And the couple who refused to bake a gay wedding cake did not have them on the list of cakes they bake. Are they free and clear too?

That doesn't matter. Public service means you serve the public. It does not allow you to discriminate between one person or another.

Those perverts came into the store and asked for a specialty cake! A cake that the owners did not advertise, and was not on the menu. It was also against their religious beliefs to bake such a cake. The Constitution gives us the right to follow our conscience. That right was denied to the owners of the bakery. And they lost their business for following their religious beliefs.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Let me ask you a simple question, Mr. Right:

What if we treated the 10 Commandments in the same manner, and we told God

"I cant follow that commandment because if conflicts with my conscience!?"

Just how do you think God would react?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Ive pretty much always thought this also Templar. People just wanting equal rights is not the problem. I will never consider it a holy union ( man + woman = a new life) but its none of my business what others do.
When the subject gets brought up over and over..and over,,, nasty things are bound to get said.
Disagreeing shouldn't be looked down on . It doesn't mean hate.

Indeed...

I've been debating this issue on the web since the mid 90s and even then, when Clinton's cult was heading up the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality, introducing 'Don't ask, Don't tell', which excited the homosexual cult to first openly dream of the legitimacy that they erroneously believe that 'marriage' offers.

I explained in thousands upon thousands of debates that Marriage is the joining of one man and one woman, and that the legitimacy they sense in marriage is the result of that standard. And that the instant that those standards are torn down, the legitimacy they crave will vanish.

I further explained, time and again, day in and out that any of them, could on THAT DAY (1994, 95...) simply get on the web, file for incorporation, set themselves and their Bestees as officers, establish a corporate charter, declare the rules, the commitments and that upon the payment to the state, they would be recognized as an unimpeachable single legal entity, with the legal right to visit in hospital, to retain retirement coin, to file income taxes collectively, to join the SS to the their entity and all other assets... . And that IF their were other considerations they felt were critical to their happiness, they could readily redress their government with their grievances with a high probability of having those grievances considered and that a distinct Federal Tax Law could be established that would provide them with EQUAL LEGAL STATUS.

But what I learned then and what has been validated time and again over the thousands of debates across the decades since, is that they are not interested in Equal Protection, or Equal Legal Status...

What they crave is what they can never have... they want LEGITIMACY... and they're prepared to do ANYTHING to get 'it', except turn from their illegitimate behavior.

Which as as been noted many times is an idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument, typically a symptom of mental disorder... and THAT is why Homosexuals have been sacked in the closet for 99.99999~% of human history.

Because what comes next, is that to be seen as LEGITIMATE, they must be seen as less offensive than something else. And what is more offensive than two people of the same gender playing house?

More than two people of the same gender playing house, where at least one of them is a minor child... who is partnered with a loving, caring adult... .

And without regard to whether the individual homosexual is even aware of it, THAT is always the game plan of sexual deviancy.

From the Roman elite, to the Japanese Samurai of historic Normalization of Sexual Abnormality, to the current Afghan Bach Bazi, where young boys are 'mentored' by Adult males... who use them for sexual gratification, it always boils down to the same thing... and THAT is why Homosexuals have spent the entirely of human history in the closet, because the few times that they've been let OUT of the closet, they shot straight for the nursery, and started their recruiting drive, making more and deeper demands upon the culture until there is just no alternative but to round 'em up and end them... driving the survivors back into the closet, into some bleeding heart down the road, suggests that maybe we should not outlaw homosexuality... when the whole re-education, starts all over again.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Let me ask you a simple question, Mr. Right:

What if we treated the 10 Commandments in the same manner, and we told God

"I cant follow that commandment because if conflicts with my conscience!?"

Just how do you think God would react?

Happens all the time. See: Sodom and Gomorra.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Sorry. But States are also governed by the 14th. You cannot pass a law that discriminates against one group or the other.

So then, the laws which prohibit pedophilia, by your reasoning, are unconstitutional?

How many times is this fatal flaw in your twisted reasoning going to have to be pointed out to you?

 

[Don_Coyote]

I had a tough go of it. No really, as a Christian I think homosexuality and gay marriage are wrong and patently sinful, thusly I don't condone either. I've really wrestled my conscience mightily over it. But after a mighty struggle and in a moment of clarity, it has dawned on me that gay people deserve rights like I do, and I will defend them, I won't force equality, I'll fight for it. America is supposed to be a bastion of freedom and free association.

Yes, the Republicans on this board can go ahead and get angry at me all they want, this position will not change. I really don't care how gay people become gay, they deserve to be treated equally. I don't have a problem with people holding true to their morals, but when they agree to serve people equally under the law, they should.

You can't just set aside a just law for the sole reason of your personal belief. You can serve people equally without ever personally condoning the lifestyle choices of others. Equality has no bias.

IMO, this is pretty basic. Its the position, opinion we all come to as we grow into adulthood.

None of us has the right to tell others how to live. We may not agree or understand the choices others make but to me, most important is if its between consenting adults.

Another way I look at it is that I don't want somebody telling me what I can do in my own bedroom. If we tell one group how they must live, how long before they think they should control everybody?

I mind my own business and think if the meddling busybodies would do the same, our world would be a lot better off.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

So, once again, why would you use government to ban gay marriage?

Marriage is the joining of One Man and One Wo-Man.

I agree! That's the whole thing! I agree!

But if people really do value the Constitution, they need to remember it applies to every law that is voted on by the states and passed by the state, likewise with the federal government, that includes bans on gay marriage.

Marriage is the joining of One Man and One Wo-Man.

Once again, I agree. Can you not read?

Can you address my comment without repeating yourself?

The comment refutes your argument.

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Wo-Man. Therefore, there is no such thing as "Horse/Man" Marriage, "Duck/Cat" Marriage, or Man/Man Marriage.

So whenever and wherever someone refers to marriage in terms which redefine what marriage is, the correct and principled response is to inform them of what Marriage >IS<.

Nothing complex about it, TK.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Those perverts came into the store and asked for a specialty cake!

Once again, they agreed to make cakes for the public.

cake that the owners did not advertise, and was not on the menu.

The only things on the menu were cakes. What else was there?

It was also against their religious beliefs to bake such a cake.

You can serve the public without ignoring your beliefs. I am a Christian, but being friends with three other gay people does not stop me from being a Christian. Same for these cake bakers.

The Constitution gives us the right to follow our conscience.

The Constitution doesn't say anything about using such a conscience in denying others of their individual freedom either.

That right was denied to the owners of the bakery. And they lost their business for following their religious beliefs.

They lost their business because they failed to obey a law they agreed to when they opened the business.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I had a tough go of it. No really, as a Christian I think homosexuality and gay marriage are wrong and patently sinful, thusly I don't condone either. I've really wrestled my conscience mightily over it. But after a mighty struggle and in a moment of clarity, it has dawned on me that gay people deserve rights like I do, and I will defend them, I won't force equality, I'll fight for it. America is supposed to be a bastion of freedom and free association.

Yes, the Republicans on this board can go ahead and get angry at me all they want, this position will not change. I really don't care how gay people become gay, they deserve to be treated equally. I don't have a problem with people holding true to their morals, but when they agree to serve people equally under the law, they should.

You can't just set aside a just law for the sole reason of your personal belief. You can serve people equally without ever personally condoning the lifestyle choices of others. Equality has no bias.

IMO, this is pretty basic. Its the position, opinion we all come to as we grow into adulthood.

None of us has the right to tell others how to live. We may not agree or understand the choices others make but to me, most important is if its between consenting adults.

Another way I look at it is that I don't want somebody telling me what I can do in my own bedroom. If we tell one group how they must live, how long before they think they should control everybody?

I mind my own business and think if the meddling busybodies would do the same, our world would be a lot better off.

We're not discussing what people do in their bedroom... we're discussing public policy, the advocacy of which rests upon abject deceit.

And THAT is the front and center concern of EVERY ADULT... It's not fun, it's not something that one does lightly, it is something one does because IT IS ESSENTIAL TO THE VIABILITY OF ONE'S CULTURE.

The failure to do so, will bring consequences FAR greater (MUCH WORSE) than the last time we allowed the SAME PEOPLE alter public policy based upon deceit... and all that did was crash the entire international financial markets, sending the planet into economic depression.

 

[Mr.Right]

Let me ask you a simple question, Mr. Right:

What if we treated the 10 Commandments in the same manner, and we told God

"I cant follow that commandment because if conflicts with my conscience!?"

Just how do you think God would react?

This ranks as one of the top ten dumbest questions I've ever heard.