Can The Govt FORCE You To Promote A Choice That Goes Against Your Religion? The Fight Continues...

[NYcarbineer]

'Religious' people have tried all sorts of schemes to use their religion to scoff at the law. And they've failed in case after case. This discrimination against gays is no different.

 

[dblack]

Maybe but until the Supreme court says otherwise public accommodation laws do not violate anyone's rights

Yes, again, we're all aware of the current legal status quo. The question is whether that's right or not. You're simply stating the obvious without making any kind of defense of your position.

 

[Syriusly]

If Jesus tells you not to provide a service to a wedding, then you should put your religion above your business and choose another line of work

Caving in to religion on these sorts of matters would turn every individual into his own personal government. Every law he objected to he could circumvent by claiming that to obey the law was against his religion.

Religion requires sacrifice

You are required to sacrifice for your religion, You can't make the law sacrifice for your religious beliefs

WHOA rightwinger!

Why isn't this applied to LGBT beliefs?
If these are to be treated equally as Christian required to put their beliefs aside in PRIVATE
and NOT impose on the public through Govt,
then WHY isn't this applied to LGBT?

Why aren't the homosexual advocates expected to keep their beliefs in private
and quit imposing this creed on the public through govt and laws? EXACTLY!

BINGO! rightwinger!!!

No one is expected or required to keep their beliefs private

A gay business owner can't refuse to sell to a Christian because the business owner doesn't approve of the Christian's Christianity.

They are treated exactly the same.

No Syriusly what is being opposed is the equivalent
requiring Atheist or LGBT business owners to go to a Christian church or service,!

No- that is so bizarrely not the same I don't even know where to begin.

A gay business owner can't refuse to sell to a Christian because the business owner doesn't approve of the Christian's Christianity.

They are treated exactly the same

 

[ScienceRocks]

I think one should have to prove such a god is real before it can be considered by the government to be warranted of consideration.

Why should faith be used to stop someone from being who they're?

 

[Syriusly]

You have freedom of religion, not freedom of business.

That's the crux of the problem, the notion that the freedom to conduct business isn't every bit as important as the freedom to practice religion.

Congress shall make no laws respecting religion therefore ALL businesses must obey public accommodation laws

Dear Skull Pilot
1. but both the LGBT and the Christian beliefs against same sex marriage
are both CREEDS..

Nope- simply untrue

Creed

• a statement of the basic beliefs of a religion
  
  
• : an idea or set of beliefs that guides the actions of a person or group

There is no LGBT creed- as there is no LGBT religion, nor is there any unifying idea or set of beliefs within the LGBT community other than they are entitled to be treated exactly the same before the law.

Dear Syriusly

1. Someone's creed does not have to be based on organized religion or else people are not equal.
The atheist who has a private belief or creed
should be equally protected by law as someone who happens to be a member of a larger group.

Otherwise you are discriminating by creed, by affiliation depending on which ones count or not!

2. LGBT beliefs are indeed "an idea or set of beliefs that guides the action of a person or group"

EX: People who BELIEVE same sex marriage is equal to traditional marriage
ARE acting on that belief to guide them.

This is a CREED. it is not proven scientifically that homosexual orientation
is determined genetically as race and is not a choice of BEHAVIOR.

The Christians cannot prove it is a behavioral choice either,
so BOTH Sides remain neither proven nor disproven.

BOTH remain faith based.
Thus both are CREEDS.

No- one is faith based, one is not.

LGBT Americans who believe that they have the same Constitutional rights as straight Americans.

If you want to call that a 'creed' then that is a 'creed' that all Americans have- the 'creed' of supporting the rights of Americans.

Creed

• a statement of the basic beliefs of a religion
  
  
• : an idea or set of beliefs that guides the actions of a person or group

Your claim that homosexuals all have the same 'creed' is frankly nonsensical.

 

[Syriusly]

If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

I completely disagree. The Constitution protects my religious freedom. If you are a LGBT and want some artwork done, your desire for that artwork does not supersede my religious freedom. I do not impose my religious beliefs on you, and you do not try to force me to do something that violates my religious beliefs.

"I reserve the right to NOT provide a service." This actually was once an acceptable sign / practice for businesses, but Liberals seek to impose their will on others, IMO. It isn't just about getting LGBT 'accepted' as a norm, but they are also trying to FORCE others to 'participate in/support it', even if it is against their religious beliefs that are protected UN-CONDITIONALLY under the Constitution.

There are other artists who would gladly take your business. There are other bakeries that would gladly take your business. But that's not good enough. 'THAT' one refuses to do so, so we MUST FORCE them to do so against their will. While 'I' may not want to support your lifestyle / choices due to 'my' religious beliefs 'I' respect your right to be a LGBT and to have rights, 'you' demonstrate 'you' have no respect for 'my' religious beliefs and Constitutional Rights.

'Evil' (as I define in this saying as someone who wants to impose their will on others) teaches 'tolerance' until they are in a position to oppress, silence, and eliminate any opposition to their beliefs."
- We are seeing that today more and more. This oppression of Constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom, to me, is an example of that.

I also believe you and I may disagree on this issue, and that is ok....

No one is trying to shut you up, unfortunately. Your religious freedom does not extend to discriminating against others if you are in business.

It doesn't have to you fucking idiot. A NON religious business also has a right to discriminate.

The government is NOT empowered to make people be nice to each other. If it is please show me where.

Repeating it over and over doesn't make it true. You don't have the right to discriminate in business and haven't been able to for over 50 years. (Title II of CRA)

We know what it means that you're just getting upset about it now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dear Seawytch the argument is that govt is being abused to go "too far" and discriminate
the other way, against business owners with Christian beliefs against same sex marriage.

There are no rules against Christian beliefs.

Business owners have been obligated to follow public accommodation laws now for 50 years.

Christian business owners have never gotten special exemptions.

 

[g5000]

Two Christian Artists Who Refuse to Serve Gay Weddings Are Likely Heading to Court to Battle the Government — but There’s a Twist

Phoenix City Code 18.4(B):
"No person shall, directly or indirectly, refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person, or aid in or incite such refusal, denial or withholding of, accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability nor shall distinction be made with respect to any person based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability in connection with the price or quality of any item, goods or services offered by or at any place of public accommodation."

According to the local government in Phoenix City your personal religious freedom can be overridden by the government, and you can be forced - as a Christian - to engage in activities that violate your religious beliefs. IMO that is a clear violation of the Constitution. (And you know d@mn-well the government would not try to apply this to Muslims for fear of 'offending them...but Christians are 'fair game'.)

Unlike other cases that have been in the news, though, these people / this business has NOT been sued or fined for refusing service for same-sex events....but they are probably still heading to court. Instead, 'Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of art company Brush & Nib, have filed a lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, Arizona' over the 'non-discrimination law' (above) 'that they claim violates their religious rights'.

"“Although the two young women happily create art for everyone regardless of sexual orientation, Phoenix interprets its law to require them to create art for events, like same-sex wedding ceremonies, that are completely at odds with their religious beliefs,” the lawyer wrote. “Phoenix also interprets its law to prevent them from explaining their religious beliefs and why they must create art consistent with their beliefs.”

"“Joanna and Breanna are exposing the pre-existing tension between Phoenix’s law and their constitutionally protected freedoms, between the right to speak and create freely and the government’s attempt to crush dissent and command conformity,” Scruggs continued. “And that is precisely what’s at stake.”

The company's owners are standing up for Christians / Christianity and is taking the fight to the city of Phoenix before anyone can bring the fight to them.

Go get 'em, girls!

The Supreme Court has said you must have a rational reason for discriminating against someone. Like, say, a child molester. It can be proven a child molester is a menace to society. So you go ahead and hang a "We don't serve child molesters" sign. No problem. You have a totally rational reason for discrimination in that case.

But there is no rational reason for discriminating against an interracial marriage or a same sex marriage. "We've always oppressed these people" is not a rational argument, even if you disguise it as a "tradition".

Your religion is protected. If you want to ban negroes or homos from your church, you can do that. I'm sure you can cite the chapter and verse from the bible for justifying your actions. I've had many a redneck in-law cite me the chapter and verse in the bible justifying slavery. Knock yourselves out.

But joint income tax returns aren't in the Bible. Neither are spousal Social Security benefits. In fact, that falls under the "render under Caesar" clause of the bible. That also happens to fall under the "equal protection of the laws" clause in the Constitution. So we're all good! Down with the tradition of oppression, up with evolving!

And you can pretend you are a god-fearing righteous Christian as you kick a homo out of your bakery so you can get to the thrice-divorced customer in line behind the faggot, but you aren't fooling anyone except yourself. You sure as shit aren't fooling God. God has a lot more to say about hypocrites in the bible than he does about homos. So you better think real hard about that.

 

[easyt65]

Two Christian Artists Who Refuse to Serve Gay Weddings Are Likely Heading to Court to Battle the Government — but There’s a Twist

Phoenix City Code 18.4(B):
"No person shall, directly or indirectly, refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person, or aid in or incite such refusal, denial or withholding of, accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability nor shall distinction be made with respect to any person based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability in connection with the price or quality of any item, goods or services offered by or at any place of public accommodation."

According to the local government in Phoenix City your personal religious freedom can be overridden by the government, and you can be forced - as a Christian - to engage in activities that violate your religious beliefs. IMO that is a clear violation of the Constitution. (And you know d@mn-well the government would not try to apply this to Muslims for fear of 'offending them...but Christians are 'fair game'.)

Unlike other cases that have been in the news, though, these people / this business has NOT been sued or fined for refusing service for same-sex events....but they are probably still heading to court. Instead, 'Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of art company Brush & Nib, have filed a lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, Arizona' over the 'non-discrimination law' (above) 'that they claim violates their religious rights'.

"“Although the two young women happily create art for everyone regardless of sexual orientation, Phoenix interprets its law to require them to create art for events, like same-sex wedding ceremonies, that are completely at odds with their religious beliefs,” the lawyer wrote. “Phoenix also interprets its law to prevent them from explaining their religious beliefs and why they must create art consistent with their beliefs.”

"“Joanna and Breanna are exposing the pre-existing tension between Phoenix’s law and their constitutionally protected freedoms, between the right to speak and create freely and the government’s attempt to crush dissent and command conformity,” Scruggs continued. “And that is precisely what’s at stake.”

The company's owners are standing up for Christians / Christianity and is taking the fight to the city of Phoenix before anyone can bring the fight to them.

Go get 'em, girls!

The Supreme Court has said you must have a rational reason for discriminating against someone. Like, say, a child molester. It can be proven a child molester is a menace to society. So you go ahead and hang a "We don't serve child molesters" sign. No problem. You have a totally rational reason for discrimination in that case.

But there is no rational reason for discriminating against an interracial marriage or a same sex marriage. "We've always oppressed these people" is not a rational argument, even if you disguise it as a "tradition".

Your religion is protected. If you want to ban negroes or homos from your church, you can do that. I'm sure you can cite the chapter and verse from the bible for justifying your actions. I've had many a redneck in-law cite me the chapter and verse in the bible justifying slavery. Knock yourselves out.

But joint income tax returns aren't in the Bible. Neither are spousal Social Security benefits. In fact, that falls under the "render under Caesar" clause of the bible. That also happens to fall under the "equal protection of the laws" clause in the Constitution. So we're all good! Down with the tradition of oppression, up with evolving!

And you can pretend you are a god-fearing righteous Christian as you kick a homo out of your bakery so you can get to the thrice-divorced customer in line behind the faggot, but you aren't fooling anyone except yourself. You sure as shit aren't fooling God. God has a lot more to say about hypocrites in the bible than he does about homos. So you better think real hard about that.

Sorry, but your constitutional right to religious freedom IS a rational and, again, constitutionally protected reason.

 

[easyt65]

That's the crux of the problem, the notion that the freedom to conduct business isn't every bit as important as the freedom to practice religion.

Congress shall make no laws respecting religion therefore ALL businesses must obey public accommodation laws

Dear Skull Pilot
1. but both the LGBT and the Christian beliefs against same sex marriage
are both CREEDS..

Nope- simply untrue

Creed

• a statement of the basic beliefs of a religion
  
  
• : an idea or set of beliefs that guides the actions of a person or group

There is no LGBT creed- as there is no LGBT religion, nor is there any unifying idea or set of beliefs within the LGBT community other than they are entitled to be treated exactly the same before the law.

Dear Syriusly

1. Someone's creed does not have to be based on organized religion or else people are not equal.
The atheist who has a private belief or creed
should be equally protected by law as someone who happens to be a member of a larger group.

Otherwise you are discriminating by creed, by affiliation depending on which ones count or not!

2. LGBT beliefs are indeed "an idea or set of beliefs that guides the action of a person or group"

EX: People who BELIEVE same sex marriage is equal to traditional marriage
ARE acting on that belief to guide them.

This is a CREED. it is not proven scientifically that homosexual orientation
is determined genetically as race and is not a choice of BEHAVIOR.

The Christians cannot prove it is a behavioral choice either,
so BOTH Sides remain neither proven nor disproven.

BOTH remain faith based.
Thus both are CREEDS.

No- one is faith based, one is not.

LGBT Americans who believe that they have the same Constitutional rights as straight Americans.

If you want to call that a 'creed' then that is a 'creed' that all Americans have- the 'creed' of supporting the rights of Americans.

Creed

• a statement of the basic beliefs of a religion
  
  
• : an idea or set of beliefs that guides the actions of a person or group

Your claim that homosexuals all have the same 'creed' is frankly nonsensical.

There is no constitutional protection for a CREED, but there is for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND THE PRACTICE THEREOF.

 

[rightwinger]

If you claim that your religion entitles you to disobey a law without penalty, that's claiming a free ticket.

Dear NYcarbineer the LGBT beliefs are also a creed.
That does not give advocates of those beliefs the right to penalize people of other creeds.

CREED is protected from discrimination.
Why can't you treat both equally as creeds, regardless which one you hold?

If you are Muslim, and a Muslim is pushing the anti-pork belief
on a Hindu business that is selling pork but not beef, suing them to substitute beef in an enchilada instead of pork, does this give you the right to violate the beliefs of the Hindu because
you and the other Muslims are pushing a case that favors YOUR beliefs?

Where is the equal protection in that?

I don't have to agree with LGBT, Christians or Muslims to defend rights to their beliefs from infringement discrimination disparagement or penalty by govt.
Do you have to agree with Christians before you will enforce laws defending their beliefs?

No, their beliefs are not creeds, they are sexual orientations, and therefore none of your or anybody else's business.

creed
krēd/
noun

1. 
   
   
   • a system of Christian or other religious belief; a faith.

Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race.

How someone expresses their inner beliefs and identity is on the same level of
CREED, like how someone expresses their Muslim Christian or Buddhist cultural IDENTITY.

NoTeaPartyPleez NYcarbineer there are many stories out there, cases of people coming out straight gay transgender
poly, etc.

Can you show me one person who started out as one ethnicity or race,
and through spiritual healing or change of lifestyle, became a different race?

Their genetics remains scientifically based on birth parents and what they inherited.
This is so specific, even the bone marrow donation programs target 4 minority groups
to save lives by finding matches that depend on ethnicity race even nationality matching:
African, Latino, Asian and Native American. This is SCIENCE based, down to 10 areas
that have to match in order for the HLA compatibility to prevent rejection between donor and recipient.

The best argument for orientation not being a choice is that
it is SPIRITUALLY determined, not genetic which can be argued as disproven when you look at twin studies.

Nobody can argue if someone BELIEVES SPIRITUALLY
they are male/female homosexual etc. and has a right to that BELIEF.

So that is the best argument I have found to defend someone legally
since BELIEFS are an inherent right and don't require scientific proof.

If you try to use genetics, the studies are opposed showing a slightly higher than 50% correlation
rate of identical twins being the same orientation. If it was genetic, the findings should be 100%.
Since they are higher than 50, this shows that social environment or other factors influence
orientation; SO IT IS MORE LIKE A CHOICE OF RELIGION and not a genetic trait like race!

Religion is not genetically fixed

You are free to choose another one

True, but the government is PROHIBITED from forcing me to do so.

You fucking dolt.

Damn skippy....

Nobody is forcing you to change religion and you can't force people to change their sexuality to conform with your religious beliefs

 

[g5000]

Two Christian Artists Who Refuse to Serve Gay Weddings Are Likely Heading to Court to Battle the Government — but There’s a Twist

Phoenix City Code 18.4(B):
"No person shall, directly or indirectly, refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person, or aid in or incite such refusal, denial or withholding of, accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability nor shall distinction be made with respect to any person based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability in connection with the price or quality of any item, goods or services offered by or at any place of public accommodation."

According to the local government in Phoenix City your personal religious freedom can be overridden by the government, and you can be forced - as a Christian - to engage in activities that violate your religious beliefs. IMO that is a clear violation of the Constitution. (And you know d@mn-well the government would not try to apply this to Muslims for fear of 'offending them...but Christians are 'fair game'.)

Unlike other cases that have been in the news, though, these people / this business has NOT been sued or fined for refusing service for same-sex events....but they are probably still heading to court. Instead, 'Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of art company Brush & Nib, have filed a lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, Arizona' over the 'non-discrimination law' (above) 'that they claim violates their religious rights'.

"“Although the two young women happily create art for everyone regardless of sexual orientation, Phoenix interprets its law to require them to create art for events, like same-sex wedding ceremonies, that are completely at odds with their religious beliefs,” the lawyer wrote. “Phoenix also interprets its law to prevent them from explaining their religious beliefs and why they must create art consistent with their beliefs.”

"“Joanna and Breanna are exposing the pre-existing tension between Phoenix’s law and their constitutionally protected freedoms, between the right to speak and create freely and the government’s attempt to crush dissent and command conformity,” Scruggs continued. “And that is precisely what’s at stake.”

The company's owners are standing up for Christians / Christianity and is taking the fight to the city of Phoenix before anyone can bring the fight to them.

Go get 'em, girls!

The Supreme Court has said you must have a rational reason for discriminating against someone. Like, say, a child molester. It can be proven a child molester is a menace to society. So you go ahead and hang a "We don't serve child molesters" sign. No problem. You have a totally rational reason for discrimination in that case.

But there is no rational reason for discriminating against an interracial marriage or a same sex marriage. "We've always oppressed these people" is not a rational argument, even if you disguise it as a "tradition".

Your religion is protected. If you want to ban negroes or homos from your church, you can do that. I'm sure you can cite the chapter and verse from the bible for justifying your actions. I've had many a redneck in-law cite me the chapter and verse in the bible justifying slavery. Knock yourselves out.

But joint income tax returns aren't in the Bible. Neither are spousal Social Security benefits. In fact, that falls under the "render under Caesar" clause of the bible. That also happens to fall under the "equal protection of the laws" clause in the Constitution. So we're all good! Down with the tradition of oppression, up with evolving!

And you can pretend you are a god-fearing righteous Christian as you kick a homo out of your bakery so you can get to the thrice-divorced customer in line behind the faggot, but you aren't fooling anyone except yourself. You sure as shit aren't fooling God. God has a lot more to say about hypocrites in the bible than he does about homos. So you better think real hard about that.

Sorry, but your constitutional right to religious freedom IS a rational and, again, constitutionally protected reason.

Like I said, you aren't fooling anyone. Certainly not God.

This isn't about religious freedom. This is about irrational hate. Just ask the hypocritical multiple marriage county clerk who violated the Bible the day she married her second husband, and again the day she married her third husband.

You are only fooling yourself. No one else.

 

[rightwinger]

If you claim that your religion entitles you to disobey a law without penalty, that's claiming a free ticket.

Dear NYcarbineer the LGBT beliefs are also a creed.
That does not give advocates of those beliefs the right to penalize people of other creeds.

CREED is protected from discrimination.
Why can't you treat both equally as creeds, regardless which one you hold?

If you are Muslim, and a Muslim is pushing the anti-pork belief
on a Hindu business that is selling pork but not beef, suing them to substitute beef in an enchilada instead of pork, does this give you the right to violate the beliefs of the Hindu because
you and the other Muslims are pushing a case that favors YOUR beliefs?

Where is the equal protection in that?

I don't have to agree with LGBT, Christians or Muslims to defend rights to their beliefs from infringement discrimination disparagement or penalty by govt.
Do you have to agree with Christians before you will enforce laws defending their beliefs?

No, their beliefs are not creeds, they are sexual orientations, and therefore none of your or anybody else's business.

creed
krēd/
noun

1. 
   
   
   • a system of Christian or other religious belief; a faith.

Sexual orientation is not genetically fixed like race.

How someone expresses their inner beliefs and identity is on the same level of
CREED, like how someone expresses their Muslim Christian or Buddhist cultural IDENTITY.

NoTeaPartyPleez NYcarbineer there are many stories out there, cases of people coming out straight gay transgender
poly, etc.

Can you show me one person who started out as one ethnicity or race,
and through spiritual healing or change of lifestyle, became a different race?

Their genetics remains scientifically based on birth parents and what they inherited.
This is so specific, even the bone marrow donation programs target 4 minority groups
to save lives by finding matches that depend on ethnicity race even nationality matching:
African, Latino, Asian and Native American. This is SCIENCE based, down to 10 areas
that have to match in order for the HLA compatibility to prevent rejection between donor and recipient.

The best argument for orientation not being a choice is that
it is SPIRITUALLY determined, not genetic which can be argued as disproven when you look at twin studies.

Nobody can argue if someone BELIEVES SPIRITUALLY
they are male/female homosexual etc. and has a right to that BELIEF.

So that is the best argument I have found to defend someone legally
since BELIEFS are an inherent right and don't require scientific proof.

If you try to use genetics, the studies are opposed showing a slightly higher than 50% correlation
rate of identical twins being the same orientation. If it was genetic, the findings should be 100%.
Since they are higher than 50, this shows that social environment or other factors influence
orientation; SO IT IS MORE LIKE A CHOICE OF RELIGION and not a genetic trait like race!

Religion is not genetically fixed

You are free to choose another one

Prove that is true anyway.

Prove that some people aren't born Christians and can't help not wanting to deal with gays.

Oh, here's a hint to where you might look. I believe the Christian gene is located right adjacent to the gay gene.



moron

You are not born with religious beliefs...they are taught to you

People are not born hating gays....they are taught

 

[rightwinger]

Why would a Muslim even apply for a job at the store that sells beer and bacon?

Why would anyone who says obeying public accommodation laws is a sin open a business that has to abide by those very same sinful laws?

Thank you, Skull Pilot
People ARE asking why don't gay couples go to a gay-friendly bakery where
the owners BELIEVE in supporting the LGBT community there!
There are SO MANY LGBT that WANT and deserve that business.

Why insist on trying to impose on a business that isn't compatible.
EXACTLY now you have it.

Take the same issue of choice of employees
seeking employment and apply that to choice of customers seeking a business.

That is not how our society works

Jim Crow said if a business does not serve negroes, you are free to find one who does
Same applies to gay couples. If you refuse to serve gays, you do not belong in business

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

I'll say it again, Obama's America really seems to be working out well when people have the time to worry about such stupid and irrelevant issues concerning another person's sexuality.

Righties, get the fuck out of everybody's bedroom and pay attention: Trump is destroying your party while you dither over lesbians ordering a wedding cake.

Don't stuff your bedroom in anyone's face and you won't have a problem.

Who is stuffing their bedroom in your face?

When you put something out for public discussion that is what you are doing. If you came and asked me to do artwork for you celebrating your personal choices and I tell you no I am not willing to paint that leave it be and go find someone willing to do what you want.

So putting "something out for public discussion" is pushing my bedroom in your face?

Let me clarify YOUR statement: I suspect when the gay couple tried to order their wedding cake they most likely went TO the bakery/caterer rather than making the baker/caterer come to their bedroom. And so straight, Christian idiots want to make that a problem.

No you want to make it a problem if a baker or an artist does not want to do something outside of their own personal religious belief. It would be like someone asking me to draw or paint something pornographic for them. Go to someone willing to do that type of work for you and leave those who don't alone.

Two Christian Artists Who Refuse to Serve Gay Weddings Are Likely Heading to Court to Battle the Government — but There’s a Twist

Phoenix City Code 18.4(B):
"No person shall, directly or indirectly, refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person, or aid in or incite such refusal, denial or withholding of, accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability nor shall distinction be made with respect to any person based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability in connection with the price or quality of any item, goods or services offered by or at any place of public accommodation."

According to the local government in Phoenix City your personal religious freedom can be overridden by the government, and you can be forced - as a Christian - to engage in activities that violate your religious beliefs. IMO that is a clear violation of the Constitution. (And you know d@mn-well the government would not try to apply this to Muslims for fear of 'offending them...but Christians are 'fair game'.)

Unlike other cases that have been in the news, though, these people / this business has NOT been sued or fined for refusing service for same-sex events....but they are probably still heading to court. Instead, 'Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of art company Brush & Nib, have filed a lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, Arizona' over the 'non-discrimination law' (above) 'that they claim violates their religious rights'.

"“Although the two young women happily create art for everyone regardless of sexual orientation, Phoenix interprets its law to require them to create art for events, like same-sex wedding ceremonies, that are completely at odds with their religious beliefs,” the lawyer wrote. “Phoenix also interprets its law to prevent them from explaining their religious beliefs and why they must create art consistent with their beliefs.”

"“Joanna and Breanna are exposing the pre-existing tension between Phoenix’s law and their constitutionally protected freedoms, between the right to speak and create freely and the government’s attempt to crush dissent and command conformity,” Scruggs continued. “And that is precisely what’s at stake.”

The company's owners are standing up for Christians / Christianity and is taking the fight to the city of Phoenix before anyone can bring the fight to them.

Go get 'em, girls!

The Supreme Court has said you must have a rational reason for discriminating against someone. Like, say, a child molester. It can be proven a child molester is a menace to society. So you go ahead and hang a "We don't serve child molesters" sign. No problem. You have a totally rational reason for discrimination in that case.

But there is no rational reason for discriminating against an interracial marriage or a same sex marriage. "We've always oppressed these people" is not a rational argument, even if you disguise it as a "tradition".

Your religion is protected. If you want to ban negroes or homos from your church, you can do that. I'm sure you can cite the chapter and verse from the bible for justifying your actions. I've had many a redneck in-law cite me the chapter and verse in the bible justifying slavery. Knock yourselves out.

But joint income tax returns aren't in the Bible. Neither are spousal Social Security benefits. In fact, that falls under the "render under Caesar" clause of the bible. That also happens to fall under the "equal protection of the laws" clause in the Constitution. So we're all good! Down with the tradition of oppression, up with evolving!

And you can pretend you are a god-fearing righteous Christian as you kick a homo out of your bakery so you can get to the thrice-divorced customer in line behind the faggot, but you aren't fooling anyone except yourself. You sure as shit aren't fooling God. God has a lot more to say about hypocrites in the bible than he does about homos. So you better think real hard about that.

Sorry, but your constitutional right to religious freedom IS a rational and, again, constitutionally protected reason.

Like I said, you aren't fooling anyone. Certainly not God.

This isn't about religious freedom. This is about irrational hate. Just ask the hypocritical multiple marriage county clerk who violated the Bible the day she married her second husband, and again the day she married her third husband.

You are only fooling yourself. No one else.

I was just getting ready to post the very same thing. They are hiding behind religion because the law forbids discrimination.

They use it as a cloak to hide their fear. But their ignorance shines through.

 

[Syriusly]

Two Christian Artists Who Refuse to Serve Gay Weddings Are Likely Heading to Court to Battle the Government — but There’s a Twist

Phoenix City Code 18.4(B):
"No person shall, directly or indirectly, refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person, or aid in or incite such refusal, denial or withholding of, accommodations, advantages, facilities or privileges thereof because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability nor shall distinction be made with respect to any person based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or disability in connection with the price or quality of any item, goods or services offered by or at any place of public accommodation."

According to the local government in Phoenix City your personal religious freedom can be overridden by the government, and you can be forced - as a Christian - to engage in activities that violate your religious beliefs. IMO that is a clear violation of the Constitution. (And you know d@mn-well the government would not try to apply this to Muslims for fear of 'offending them...but Christians are 'fair game'.)

Unlike other cases that have been in the news, though, these people / this business has NOT been sued or fined for refusing service for same-sex events....but they are probably still heading to court. Instead, 'Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski, owners of art company Brush & Nib, have filed a lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, Arizona' over the 'non-discrimination law' (above) 'that they claim violates their religious rights'.

"“Although the two young women happily create art for everyone regardless of sexual orientation, Phoenix interprets its law to require them to create art for events, like same-sex wedding ceremonies, that are completely at odds with their religious beliefs,” the lawyer wrote. “Phoenix also interprets its law to prevent them from explaining their religious beliefs and why they must create art consistent with their beliefs.”

"“Joanna and Breanna are exposing the pre-existing tension between Phoenix’s law and their constitutionally protected freedoms, between the right to speak and create freely and the government’s attempt to crush dissent and command conformity,” Scruggs continued. “And that is precisely what’s at stake.”

The company's owners are standing up for Christians / Christianity and is taking the fight to the city of Phoenix before anyone can bring the fight to them.

Go get 'em, girls!

The Supreme Court has said you must have a rational reason for discriminating against someone. Like, say, a child molester. It can be proven a child molester is a menace to society. So you go ahead and hang a "We don't serve child molesters" sign. No problem. You have a totally rational reason for discrimination in that case.

But there is no rational reason for discriminating against an interracial marriage or a same sex marriage. "We've always oppressed these people" is not a rational argument, even if you disguise it as a "tradition".

Your religion is protected. If you want to ban negroes or homos from your church, you can do that. I'm sure you can cite the chapter and verse from the bible for justifying your actions. I've had many a redneck in-law cite me the chapter and verse in the bible justifying slavery. Knock yourselves out.

But joint income tax returns aren't in the Bible. Neither are spousal Social Security benefits. In fact, that falls under the "render under Caesar" clause of the bible. That also happens to fall under the "equal protection of the laws" clause in the Constitution. So we're all good! Down with the tradition of oppression, up with evolving!

And you can pretend you are a god-fearing righteous Christian as you kick a homo out of your bakery so you can get to the thrice-divorced customer in line behind the faggot, but you aren't fooling anyone except yourself. You sure as shit aren't fooling God. God has a lot more to say about hypocrites in the bible than he does about homos. So you better think real hard about that.

Sorry, but your constitutional right to religious freedom IS a rational and, again, constitutionally protected reason.

Your constitutional right to religious freedom doesn't allow you to break the law.

For example, parents cannot beat their children until they are bloody- and then claim it is their religious right to do so- because they were just following the Bible's commandment:

Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.

In the same way- a Muslim cannot refuse to serve a Christian just because he believes it is sinful to sell halal meat to an infidel.

 

[dblack]

The Supreme Court has said you must have a rational reason for discriminating against someone.

Where did you get that idea? I've seen nothing at all that broad.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If your religion prohibits you from adhering to public accommodation laws then you shouldn't have a business.

It's no different than a Muslim applying for a job in a bacon store and then saying he can't touch bacon because of his stupid religion

I completely disagree. The Constitution protects my religious freedom. If you are a LGBT and want some artwork done, your desire for that artwork does not supersede my religious freedom. I do not impose my religious beliefs on you, and you do not try to force me to do something that violates my religious beliefs.

"I reserve the right to NOT provide a service." This actually was once an acceptable sign / practice for businesses, but Liberals seek to impose their will on others, IMO. It isn't just about getting LGBT 'accepted' as a norm, but they are also trying to FORCE others to 'participate in/support it', even if it is against their religious beliefs that are protected UN-CONDITIONALLY under the Constitution.

There are other artists who would gladly take your business. There are other bakeries that would gladly take your business. But that's not good enough. 'THAT' one refuses to do so, so we MUST FORCE them to do so against their will. While 'I' may not want to support your lifestyle / choices due to 'my' religious beliefs 'I' respect your right to be a LGBT and to have rights, 'you' demonstrate 'you' have no respect for 'my' religious beliefs and Constitutional Rights.

'Evil' (as I define in this saying as someone who wants to impose their will on others) teaches 'tolerance' until they are in a position to oppress, silence, and eliminate any opposition to their beliefs."
- We are seeing that today more and more. This oppression of Constitutionally protected rights of religious freedom, to me, is an example of that.

I also believe you and I may disagree on this issue, and that is ok....

No one is trying to shut you up, unfortunately. Your religious freedom does not extend to discriminating against others if you are in business.

It doesn't have to you fucking idiot. A NON religious business also has a right to discriminate.

The government is NOT empowered to make people be nice to each other. If it is please show me where.

The government has the power to make discrimination illegal. That should be obvious.

 

[Syriusly]

Congress shall make no laws respecting religion therefore ALL businesses must obey public accommodation laws

Dear Skull Pilot
1. but both the LGBT and the Christian beliefs against same sex marriage
are both CREEDS..

Nope- simply untrue

Creed

• a statement of the basic beliefs of a religion
  
  
• : an idea or set of beliefs that guides the actions of a person or group

There is no LGBT creed- as there is no LGBT religion, nor is there any unifying idea or set of beliefs within the LGBT community other than they are entitled to be treated exactly the same before the law.

Dear Syriusly

1. Someone's creed does not have to be based on organized religion or else people are not equal.
The atheist who has a private belief or creed
should be equally protected by law as someone who happens to be a member of a larger group.

Otherwise you are discriminating by creed, by affiliation depending on which ones count or not!

2. LGBT beliefs are indeed "an idea or set of beliefs that guides the action of a person or group"

EX: People who BELIEVE same sex marriage is equal to traditional marriage
ARE acting on that belief to guide them.

This is a CREED. it is not proven scientifically that homosexual orientation
is determined genetically as race and is not a choice of BEHAVIOR.

The Christians cannot prove it is a behavioral choice either,
so BOTH Sides remain neither proven nor disproven.

BOTH remain faith based.
Thus both are CREEDS.

No- one is faith based, one is not.

LGBT Americans who believe that they have the same Constitutional rights as straight Americans.

If you want to call that a 'creed' then that is a 'creed' that all Americans have- the 'creed' of supporting the rights of Americans.

Creed

• a statement of the basic beliefs of a religion
  
  
• : an idea or set of beliefs that guides the actions of a person or group

Your claim that homosexuals all have the same 'creed' is frankly nonsensical.

There is no constitutional protection for a CREED, but there is for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND THE PRACTICE THEREOF.

Well since I am not arguing that any gay person is part of a Creed- I don't have any reason to argue with that.

But you are correct- gay Christians have their rights protected under the Constitution too.

Christians still have to follow the law though.

 

[Silhouette]

No one is trying to shut you up, unfortunately. Your religious freedom does not extend to discriminating against others if you are in business.

So then a gay artist can't refuse on principle to print a billboard for a Christian that reads "Homosexuality is a sin unto God". Right? He can be fined or jailed for refusing to do that.

If the gay artist provides art for billboards- no he cannot turn it down just because he disapproves of the religious beliefs of the customer.

He would be acting just like the baker- and violating the law the same way.

So then it's time to put that one to a legal test. Christians? Know any gay graphic art companies in your town?

 

[dblack]

The government has the power to make discrimination illegal. That should be obvious.

It should be obviously insane.

Nevertheless, you're right. The government has the power to do whatever we let them get away with.