Arizona Senate Passes Bill Allowing Business Owners To Refuse Service To Gays

[DriftingSand]

Yes, another topic for another thread -- but many preachers, pastors and christians throughout the south used the bible to defend slavery and subjugating blacks. Evidence of that is rife.

Do you have any documentation to substantiate your claim? "Many preachers, pastors, and Christians" or some? You will have to cite "many" specific circumstances if you have any hope of proving your point. There were thousands upon thousands of white Christians using biblical standards to help free the slaves. Again ... you should start a new thread if you wish to continue this conversation. This post really revolves around religious freedom vs. religious persecution ... not slavery.

 

[kaz]

Yes, another topic for another thread -- but many preachers, pastors and christians throughout the south used the bible to defend slavery and subjugating blacks. Evidence of that is rife.

Do you have any documentation to substantiate your claim? "Many preachers, pastors, and Christians" or some? You will have to cite "many" specific circumstances if you have any hope of proving your point. There were thousands upon thousands of white Christians using biblical standards to help free the slaves. Again ... you should start a new thread if you wish to continue this conversation. This post really revolves around religious freedom vs. religious persecution ... not slavery.

Churches were deeply involved in fighting slavery and assisting runaway slaves. And most Christians today are not anti-gay and don't believe anyone is going to hell for being gay.

If one Christian believes something liberals don't like, they can paint all Christians with their wide brush. But if all Democrats say the same thing, you can't generalize that someone who is a Democrat believes that.

Liberalism, it is a double standard, wrapped in a hypocrisy, inside cluelessness...

 

[Iceweasel]

Liberalism, it is a double standard, wrapped in a hypocrisy, inside cluelessness...

I have often said that liberalism and hypocrisy are two sides of the same coin. I've never met a liberal that wasn't a hypocrite.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Special union huh? I gather your dad isn't a divorce attorney?

A divorce attorney can change biology? WTF?

I simply disagree that anyone should be forced to take someone's money "because it's their job". A business is private property as far as I'm concerned, to be used as the owner sees fit.

That concept is lost on many. I wonder how many of them have businesses. It might be bad for business but the marketplace should decide on the winners and losers, not government or special interest groups.

I own a business, and have for a long time. I have no problem with PA laws.

Your stupidity is no mandate that the rest of us have to be idiots on any other subject, so why should it be when it comes to your love of giving up your rights? Right and wrong don't change just because you're ignorant enough to embrace being wrong.

 

[johnwk]

You're just homophobic. Now you know.

And you appear to ignore rights associated with property ownership!

As I previously noted:

This is another attack upon rights associated with property ownership just like the smoking control freaks who also use government force to seize control over another person’s private property for their personal use and enjoyment who forbid the owner of said property to allow his guests to smoke thereon. But we were warned against submitting to such tyranny:


”Submit to despotism for an hour and you concede the principle. John Adams said, in 1775, “Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud.” It is the only thing a people determined to be free can do. Republics have often failed, and have been succeeded by the most revolting despotisms; and always it was the voice of timidity, cowardice, or false leaders counseling submission, that led to the final downfall of freedom. It was the cowardice and treachery of the Senate of Rome that allowed the usurper to gain power, inch by inch, to overthrow the Republic. The history of the downfall of Republics is the same in all ages. The first inch that is yielded to despotism - the first blow, dealt at the Constitution, that is not resisted - is the beginning of the end of the nation’s ruin.” See: THE OLD GUARD, A MONTHLY JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF 1776 AND 1787, HOW TO TREAT UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTS OF CONGRESS


When these control freaks are finished there will be nothing left standing but publically owned property and the iron fist of a communist government!


JWK

[P]roperty [does not] lose its private character merely because the public is generally invited to use it for designated purposes. _____ LLOYD CORP. v. TANNER, 407 U.S. 551 (1972)

Got anything else besides copy%paste gibberish that's not relevant to my point?

In case you have not figured it out, rights associated with property ownership is that which is being attacked. And if these control freaks are not stopped there will be nothing left standing but publically owned property and the iron fist of a communist government!


JWK





Is America on the verge of submitting to communism without a shot being fired?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A divorce attorney can change biology? WTF?That concept is lost on many. I wonder how many of them have businesses. It might be bad for business but the marketplace should decide on the winners and losers, not government or special interest groups.

I own a business, and have for a long time. I have no problem with PA laws.

Your stupidity is no mandate that the rest of us have to be idiots on any other subject, so why should it be when it comes to your love of giving up your rights? Right and wrong don't change just because you're ignorant enough to embrace being wrong.

Burning witches used to be "right". How come it's "wrong" now? Did something, ah, change?

 

[Silhouette]

You guys are still caught up in comparing "sin for sin" eh?

Its a mortal sin for an individual to murder, etc. It's a sin of an entire society to facilitate the usurping of God's matrix of male-female sexuality and it's being the backbone wherein a non gender-blended interaction can serve to test the individuals.

The church of LGBT has been quite open about their bid to dissolve God's matrix, to blend everything together. That is the sin. And it cannot be allowed for reasons quite possibly, and naturally so, out of the reach of the grasp or understanding of most people reading this.

So naturally the mistake or the purposeful misrepresentation of anyone rebutting this post from the new church of LGBT would be to say, "So if most people don't get it, then it doesn't have merit and christians should just drop it!"

And the answer to that is, NO. For there wouldn't be any religion if people understood the reasons behind everything. But we don't. And if you accept that there is a higher being, a greater intelligence behind this big Plan we are all in, then you will have to accept that there will be concepts and warnings from this higher being that will defy the masses' natural inclinations to the endless indulgences and temptations of the flesh that are far, far wiser than we mere humans will ever understand.

Suffice to say that in Jude 1 and Romans 1, even if we do not understand the why of homosexual cultural promotion being one of the gravest mortal sins around, we surely will get the "here's what will happen if you don't abide" angle.

That is spelled out quite clearly for all to "get"...

JUDE 1

3. Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

4. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

5. I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not...

..7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire...

...14. And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

15. To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

16. These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

17. But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;

18. How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

19. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

20. But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,

21. Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

22. And of some have compassion, making a difference:

23. And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

24. Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy..

ROMANS 1

22. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25. Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27. And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29. Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30. Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31. Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32. Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

That isn't an ambigious gray area there folks. That's a direct statement on promotion of or participation in a homosexual lifestyle.

Homosexuals do now and will always exist. But in Jude 1 it tells the faithful to extend compassion to them even as they unwaveringly resist their smooth speech to allow their behaviors any badge of normalcy. People of many mental imbalances must always deserve our compassion but never a promotion of their flawed behaviors as "normal". That is the sin of tampering with the matrix.

 

[Bumberclyde]

And you appear to ignore rights associated with property ownership!

As I previously noted:

Got anything else besides copy%paste gibberish that's not relevant to my point?

In case you have not figured it out, rights associated with property ownership is that which is being attacked. And if these control freaks are not stopped there will be nothing left standing but publically owned property and the iron fist of a communist government!

JWK


Is America on the verge of submitting to communism without a shot being fired?

Refusing to serve gays is homophobic and not a religious objection, since jesus would have served gays. Unless the cake maker was muslim, in which case he and his family of camels should be deported asap.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberalism, it is a double standard, wrapped in a hypocrisy, inside cluelessness...

I have often said that liberalism and hypocrisy are two sides of the same coin. I've never met a liberal that wasn't a hypocrite.

You've never met a human being who wasn't a hypocrite, about something. you just aren't smart enough to figure it out and don't know that an honest human being will admit it.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Well, I think using the Commerce Clause for social engineering, to mitigate race relations and manipulate social mores, is very overreaching, regardless of how much 'case law' supports the practice. Laws that dictate whom we must associate with and why are inhumane and deeply violate basic freedom of conscience.

Name one law that forces you to associate with anyone.
The subject is "religious freedom" and the guidelines as what that exactly means when we write laws granting exemptions for that vague term.
One can claim that their religion bars them from waiting on gay people because they believe gay folks are sinners yet they will wait on someone that was a convicted felon for fraud and they cheat on their wife.
"Religious freedom" is what is being argued here and NO ONE has ever seen a case in Arizona where a business owner's religious freedom has been violated.
Similar to passing a jaywalking ordinance where there are no roads.

Forcing a Christian baker to write "Congratulations To Adam & Steve On Their Special Wedding Day" IS a violation of the baker's religious freedom if the baker sees homosexuality as an absolute violation of the religious tenets he believes and accepts as true. He's being forced to condone and participate in an event that the Bible considers to be of "the world." The Bible specifically states that Christians are to avoid worldly pleasures and activities at all costs. Therefore, forcing the baker to bake a cake for a "gay" wedding is a direct assault on his religious freedom and beliefs.

1 Thessalonians 5:22, "Abstain from all appearance of evil."

1 John 2:15, "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him."

James 4:4, "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God."

1 John 2:16, "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

Romans 12:2, "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."

Following are some of the definitions of "world" as found in the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance (take special note of the definitions in red):

Strong's world #G2889 - "World" (or Greek "kosmos"):

1. an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government
2. ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3
3. the world, the universe
4. the circle of the earth, the earth
5. the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family
6. the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ
7. world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly
   1. the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ
8. any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort
   1. the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)

The above definition was borrowed from the site found at this link: Greek Lexicon :: G2889 (KJV)

Well, then, by God, he had better not sell a wedding cake to anyone who is obese or lazy or who smokes or who drinks or who has had an affair or who was once divorced or who has ever eaten shrimps or who has ever walked more than 15 paces in the rain on the sabbath, for those are all abominable sins in the bible, right up with Homosexuality. By God, he better not sell to any of THOSE people. Oh, and masturbators? No go. We all know that God literally fried a masturbator the moment his seed hit the ground.

Just let me know if you, as a Christian, will be able to find any customer who will not offend your delicate religious sensibilities. Good luck with that one!!!

 

[kaz]

Liberalism, it is a double standard, wrapped in a hypocrisy, inside cluelessness...

I have often said that liberalism and hypocrisy are two sides of the same coin. I've never met a liberal that wasn't a hypocrite.

Their problem is that they think of themselves as liberals, who are open minded and tolerant, but in reality they are authoritarian leftists who are closed minded and rigidly intolerant. That contradiction in their views and their self perception leads to unending hypocrisy in what they say and the positions they advocate.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Got anything else besides copy%paste gibberish that's not relevant to my point?

In case you have not figured it out, rights associated with property ownership is that which is being attacked. And if these control freaks are not stopped there will be nothing left standing but publically owned property and the iron fist of a communist government!

JWK


Is America on the verge of submitting to communism without a shot being fired?

Refusing to serve gays is homophobic and not a religious objection, since jesus would have served gays. Unless the cake maker was muslim, in which case he and his family of camels should be deported asap.

Interesting contradictory statements there. I wonder, do you see it?

 

[DriftingSand]

Yes, another topic for another thread -- but many preachers, pastors and christians throughout the south used the bible to defend slavery and subjugating blacks. Evidence of that is rife.

Do you have any documentation to substantiate your claim? "Many preachers, pastors, and Christians" or some? You will have to cite "many" specific circumstances if you have any hope of proving your point. There were thousands upon thousands of white Christians using biblical standards to help free the slaves. Again ... you should start a new thread if you wish to continue this conversation. This post really revolves around religious freedom vs. religious persecution ... not slavery.

Churches were deeply involved in fighting slavery and assisting runaway slaves. And most Christians today are not anti-gay and don't believe anyone is going to hell for being gay.

If one Christian believes something liberals don't like, they can paint all Christians with their wide brush. But if all Democrats say the same thing, you can't generalize that someone who is a Democrat believes that.

Liberalism, it is a double standard, wrapped in a hypocrisy, inside cluelessness...

I certainly don't hate "gays" but I do believe that they may be in jeopardy of hell if they don't repent of their sins. The same is true of anyone who rejects the Gospel of Christ in favor of embracing his or her particular sinful behavior. However, I'm not the final Judge. There is One much greater than myself Who has reserved that job for Himself. Each and every one of us will have to stand before Him and answer for our actions. A day of judgment IS coming (if we believe what the Bible says).

The bottom line for me is that I believe a business owner has the right to model his or her business in a manner that fits his or her particular belief system. If any one of us doesn't like a business person's business model then we have the right to do business elsewhere. None of us has the right to force a business owner to cave into our personal whims. If that were the case then I could force "gay" business owners to conform to my personal whims and beliefs.

 

[Iceweasel]

Burning witches used to be "right". How come it's "wrong" now? Did something, ah, change?

Burning witches happened therefore any change is good? That's insane.

You guys are still caught up in comparing "sin for sin" eh?

No, I'm not religious myself but the point you can't grasp is that it isn't up to you to define someone else's morality. No one can understand it for you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So if I don't want to serve blacks, I can post a sign in the window saying: "We don't serve Blacks"? Or "Blacks must sit in the back of the restaurant"?

Ahhh.. the predictable redirect

Being black is not a choice, action, behavior, or event as a result of such things..

You having a 'gay wedding is a chosen action and particular to a behavior you wish to participate in

You do not get to force others to be a part of it in a free society

Ya, but what if I start a religion that hates blacks? Don't I have freedom of religion?

So being gay is a choice?

What if you do? You keep shouting, "Blacks! Blacks! What if it was the BLACKS?!" as though you think that's some sort of trump card where everyone's going to go, "Oh, well, THAT makes it different!" It doesn't.

As to gay being a choice, why don't you ask your progressive asshole buddy who told us all that the real problem was that we just hadn't tried gay sex and discovered how much fun it was, and we should go to a gay bar and pick someone up? Clearly, being gay IS a choice.

It must make you so proud to know that you have someone like that on your side.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Their problem is that they think of themselves as liberals, who are open minded and tolerant...

And you got that idea where exactly? It's wrong by the way. Liberals are more of those two than many others but there are very significant limits on both of those, for very good reasons.

What you just posted isn't true.

 

[kaz]

Do you have any documentation to substantiate your claim? "Many preachers, pastors, and Christians" or some? You will have to cite "many" specific circumstances if you have any hope of proving your point. There were thousands upon thousands of white Christians using biblical standards to help free the slaves. Again ... you should start a new thread if you wish to continue this conversation. This post really revolves around religious freedom vs. religious persecution ... not slavery.

Churches were deeply involved in fighting slavery and assisting runaway slaves. And most Christians today are not anti-gay and don't believe anyone is going to hell for being gay.

If one Christian believes something liberals don't like, they can paint all Christians with their wide brush. But if all Democrats say the same thing, you can't generalize that someone who is a Democrat believes that.

Liberalism, it is a double standard, wrapped in a hypocrisy, inside cluelessness...

I certainly don't hate "gays" but I do believe that they may be in jeopardy of hell if they don't repent of their sins. The same is true of anyone who rejects the Gospel of Christ in favor of embracing his or her particular sinful behavior. However, I'm not the final Judge. There is One much greater than myself Who has reserved that job for Himself. Each and every one of us will have to stand before Him and answer for our actions. A day of judgment IS coming (if we believe what the Bible says).

The red makes me respect your opinion even though I don't have an issue with anyone being gay. I don't understand why God would make someone that way, and then demand they not be that way even though they aren't harming anyone. But as you say, it's in the end not up to us. You don't sound like anyone who's going to go out and harm anyone.

The bottom line for me is that I believe a business owner has the right to model his or her business in a manner that fits his or her particular belief system. If any one of us doesn't like a business person's business model then we have the right to do business elsewhere. None of us has the right to force a business owner to cave into our personal whims. If that were the case then I could force "gay" business owners to conform to my personal whims and beliefs.

Bam! Total agreement. Business owners shouldn't be forced to do business with anyone for any reason, it's just a crime against the people when they do.

 

[kaz]

Their problem is that they think of themselves as liberals, who are open minded and tolerant...

And you got that idea where exactly? It's wrong by the way. Liberals are more of those two than many others but there are very significant limits on both of those, for very good reasons.

What you just posted isn't true.

Interesting, a liberal who doesn't think the people who call themselves liberals are close minded and rigidly intolerant. Wow, I didn't see that one coming...

Liberalism is a rigid ideology that abides no dissent on any issue from anyone. Liberals aren't "more of those two" than anyone.

 

[DriftingSand]

Name one law that forces you to associate with anyone.
The subject is "religious freedom" and the guidelines as what that exactly means when we write laws granting exemptions for that vague term.
One can claim that their religion bars them from waiting on gay people because they believe gay folks are sinners yet they will wait on someone that was a convicted felon for fraud and they cheat on their wife.
"Religious freedom" is what is being argued here and NO ONE has ever seen a case in Arizona where a business owner's religious freedom has been violated.
Similar to passing a jaywalking ordinance where there are no roads.

Forcing a Christian baker to write "Congratulations To Adam & Steve On Their Special Wedding Day" IS a violation of the baker's religious freedom if the baker sees homosexuality as an absolute violation of the religious tenets he believes and accepts as true. He's being forced to condone and participate in an event that the Bible considers to be of "the world." The Bible specifically states that Christians are to avoid worldly pleasures and activities at all costs. Therefore, forcing the baker to bake a cake for a "gay" wedding is a direct assault on his religious freedom and beliefs.

1 Thessalonians 5:22, "Abstain from all appearance of evil."

1 John 2:15, "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him."

James 4:4, "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God."

1 John 2:16, "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world."

Romans 12:2, "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."

Following are some of the definitions of "world" as found in the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance (take special note of the definitions in red):

Strong's world #G2889 - "World" (or Greek "kosmos"):

1. an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government
2. ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3
3. the world, the universe
4. the circle of the earth, the earth
5. the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family
6. the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ
7. world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly
   1. the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ
8. any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort
   1. the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)

The above definition was borrowed from the site found at this link: Greek Lexicon :: G2889 (KJV)

Well, then, by God, he had better not sell a wedding cake to anyone who is obese or lazy or who smokes or who drinks or who has had an affair or who was once divorced or who has ever eaten shrimps or who has ever walked more than 15 paces in the rain on the sabbath, for those are all abominable sins in the bible, right up with Homosexuality. By God, he better not sell to any of THOSE people. Oh, and masturbators? No go. We all know that God literally fried a masturbator the moment his seed hit the ground.

Just let me know if you, as a Christian, will be able to find any customer who will not offend your delicate religious sensibilities. Good luck with that one!!!

It should be up to the business owner. That means that if someone wants a cake with icing in the shape of a pot-leaf he shouldn't have to bake it if he's opposed to pot use. If someone wants a cake with nude statuettes on it he shouldn't be forced to bake it (or decorate it) if he's opposed to nudism. See the point? It's really that simple. He should have the right to say NO to activities that he's personally opposed to -- including homosexuality.

Now, if a homosexual wants someone to bake him a cake he need not tell the baker what his sexual orientation is. The cake could remain blank then the homosexual could decorate it to his liking when he got home. Wouldn't that be a fair solution to this problem?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Burning witches used to be "right". How come it's "wrong" now? Did something, ah, change?

Burning witches happened therefore any change is good? That's insane.

You guys are still caught up in comparing "sin for sin" eh?

No, I'm not religious myself but the point you can't grasp is that it isn't up to you to define someone else's morality. No one can understand it for you.

You are a strange little fellow, I must say that. Burning witches used to be considered right, and now it isn't. The Bible says do not allow a witch to live. And we do define morality for others, all day long here, we call it the Law. You have your morals and your society also has morals. Both exist at the same time. Sometimes yours win, sometimes society's win. Okay?