Christian B&B refuses to back down to homosexual terrorism

[Montrovant]

No, he got the point perfect. If it was about living in a free country and getting to decide, then we'd see challenges to the Title II of the Civil Rights Act and not challenges to State and local laws that protect gays. If it was "freedom", you fuckers would be going after the big one.

None of this is about freedom or you'd see challenges to the FEDERAL Public Accommodation laws and none of this is about Christianity or you'd see Christians refusing service to divorced people.

It's purely about hating gays. We're not fooled.

No, you missed the point too. You are not god. You cannot become god. Spewing your idiotic ideas on a message board won't make you god. You cannot decide how other people should think. It's ALL about freedom, you are either too dishonest or stupid to understand.

There is no evidence to support your contention that this is about "freedom". Evidence would be challenges to Title II of the CRA which requires the gay to serve the Christian, but not the Christian to serve the gay.

You're fooling no one.

The evidence is that people are being sued for not participating in homosexual events.

The evidence is cities and states have added alternative sexuality to PA laws because the Constitution doesn't provide it.

The evidence is that states are passing laws to protect citizens from participating in the above.

NO ONE can understand it for you. Your stupidity is your problem. To get something like this so wrong proves you cannot grasp simple concepts. Life for you must be hard. I guess that's why you have all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards, who would hire you?

Your stats show 20,000 posts in 3 years, Seawytch's stats show 26,000 posts in 6 years.

Your stat is zero since you missed or couldn't understand the point. Everyone of hers is progay propaganda and I have discussed quite a range of topics. Most of mine are before and after work so no, I don't have all day to post. Pop your head out of your ass or just be another worthless poster. Your call.

You said she has "all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards". I pointed out that you have posted more frequently here than she has. The content of the posts is immaterial to my point, which is that talking about how someone has all day to post on message boards is silly when you post more frequently on the message board where you make that claim.

 

[Silhouette]

So can a Rabbi refuse to officiate the wedding of two Nazis? Thanks for your help.

Yes.,,,The performance of religious services by members of the Clergy are not covered under Public Accommodation laws.

What makes a clergyman have closer access to the 1st Amendment than a parishioner?

A member of the clergy performing a religoius ceremony as a function of a non-profit religious organization does not fall under Public Accommodation laws that apply to for profit businesses.


>>>>

Where is it written in the constitution "Freedom of clergymen to exercise of their religion"? or "freedom of non-profits"? I thought the freedoms and protections applied to everyone. Are you saying even clergymen don't have protection but your cult is "being kind for now"...until eventually they too will bow to PA laws? What about a minister that takes fees to marry people of all denominations? Is that not a for-profit accommodation?

Do you believe a person's religion ends the moment they step over the threshold of a church door and head for their car in the parking lot? How about after? When their car leaves the lot?

 

[Iceweasel]

No, you missed the point too. You are not god. You cannot become god. Spewing your idiotic ideas on a message board won't make you god. You cannot decide how other people should think. It's ALL about freedom, you are either too dishonest or stupid to understand.

There is no evidence to support your contention that this is about "freedom". Evidence would be challenges to Title II of the CRA which requires the gay to serve the Christian, but not the Christian to serve the gay.

You're fooling no one.

The evidence is that people are being sued for not participating in homosexual events.

The evidence is cities and states have added alternative sexuality to PA laws because the Constitution doesn't provide it.

The evidence is that states are passing laws to protect citizens from participating in the above.

NO ONE can understand it for you. Your stupidity is your problem. To get something like this so wrong proves you cannot grasp simple concepts. Life for you must be hard. I guess that's why you have all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards, who would hire you?

Your stats show 20,000 posts in 3 years, Seawytch's stats show 26,000 posts in 6 years.

Your stat is zero since you missed or couldn't understand the point. Everyone of hers is progay propaganda and I have discussed quite a range of topics. Most of mine are before and after work so no, I don't have all day to post. Pop your head out of your ass or just be another worthless poster. Your call.

You said she has "all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards". I pointed out that you have posted more frequently here than she has. The content of the posts is immaterial to my point, which is that talking about how someone has all day to post on message boards is silly when you post more frequently on the message board where you make that claim.

I haven't posted all day and I am not posting on a singular topic so of course that makes a difference. That's too much for you to understand so I have to reject your stupidity for what it is.

 

[Montrovant]

There is no evidence to support your contention that this is about "freedom". Evidence would be challenges to Title II of the CRA which requires the gay to serve the Christian, but not the Christian to serve the gay.

You're fooling no one.

The evidence is that people are being sued for not participating in homosexual events.

The evidence is cities and states have added alternative sexuality to PA laws because the Constitution doesn't provide it.

The evidence is that states are passing laws to protect citizens from participating in the above.

NO ONE can understand it for you. Your stupidity is your problem. To get something like this so wrong proves you cannot grasp simple concepts. Life for you must be hard. I guess that's why you have all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards, who would hire you?

Your stats show 20,000 posts in 3 years, Seawytch's stats show 26,000 posts in 6 years.

Your stat is zero since you missed or couldn't understand the point. Everyone of hers is progay propaganda and I have discussed quite a range of topics. Most of mine are before and after work so no, I don't have all day to post. Pop your head out of your ass or just be another worthless poster. Your call.

You said she has "all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards". I pointed out that you have posted more frequently here than she has. The content of the posts is immaterial to my point, which is that talking about how someone has all day to post on message boards is silly when you post more frequently on the message board where you make that claim.

I haven't posted all day and I am not posting on a singular topic so of course that makes a difference. That's too much for you to understand so I have to reject your stupidity for what it is.

What on earth are you talking about?

I don't care what topics you post about. My only point, as already stated, is that making claims about how much time someone else has to post looks foolish when you post more often than that person. The posting statistics given by this site show you posting more frequently than Seawytch, who you said has "all day every day" to post. It doesn't matter if every one of your posts is on a different subject. You still post more frequently than she does.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

So can a Rabbi refuse to officiate the wedding of two Nazis? Thanks for your help.

Yes.,,,The performance of religious services by members of the Clergy are not covered under Public Accommodation laws.

What makes a clergyman have closer access to the 1st Amendment than a parishioner?

A member of the clergy performing a religoius ceremony as a function of a non-profit religious organization does not fall under Public Accommodation laws that apply to for profit businesses.


>>>>

Where is it written in the constitution "Freedom of clergymen to exercise of their religion"? or "freedom of non-profits"? I thought the freedoms and protections applied to everyone. Are you saying even clergymen don't have protection but your cult is "being kind for now"...until eventually they too will bow to PA laws? What about a minister that takes fees to marry people of all denominations? Is that not a for-profit accommodation?

Do you believe a person's religion ends the moment they step over the threshold of a church door and head for their car in the parking lot? How about after? When their car leaves the lot?

Do you believe a person's religion ends the moment they step over the threshold of a church door and head for their car in the parking lot? How about after? When their car leaves the lot?

Actually, for most of the ones I know it does.

 

[pismoe]

I see no reason for a doctor to have a right to discriminate based on a patient's religion.

-------------------------------- in a FREE country any reason is acceptable SwimExpert .

Do you want freedom or anarchy? Just how are you defining free in this instance?

I actually agree with the idea of private businesses being allowed to discriminate, but the question is how it works in practice. The only real history we have to go by would indicate allowing businesses to discriminate against whomever they choose would be a bad thing.

--------------------------- never bothered me , if a private owner , business didn't want my money I just went somewhere else Montrovant .

And perhaps that is all that would happen if we got rid of PA laws. The worry is that certain segments of the population, such as gays, would have a hard time functioning when most, or all, businesses in an area refuse to do business with them. I'm cynic enough to think such an outcome is quite possible.

-------------------------------------- that'd be a good place for a gay dentist , gay cake baker , gay apartment building and gay B.B. Montrovant .

---------------------------------------- any of the trades or newly opened businesses run by gays that I mention would likely make lots of money and the other businesses would retain their Freedom to keep their values . Maybe some of the businesses might change their mind because they want gay money Montrovant .

 

[Montrovant]

-------------------------------- in a FREE country any reason is acceptable SwimExpert .

Do you want freedom or anarchy? Just how are you defining free in this instance?

I actually agree with the idea of private businesses being allowed to discriminate, but the question is how it works in practice. The only real history we have to go by would indicate allowing businesses to discriminate against whomever they choose would be a bad thing.

--------------------------- never bothered me , if a private owner , business didn't want my money I just went somewhere else Montrovant .

And perhaps that is all that would happen if we got rid of PA laws. The worry is that certain segments of the population, such as gays, would have a hard time functioning when most, or all, businesses in an area refuse to do business with them. I'm cynic enough to think such an outcome is quite possible.

-------------------------------------- that'd be a good place for a gay dentist , gay cake baker , gay apartment building and gay B.B. Montrovant .

---------------------------------------- any of the trades or businesses run by gays that I mention would likely make lots of money and the other businesses would retain their Freedom to keep their values . Maybe some of the businesses might change their mind because they want gay money Montrovant .

It might well work out that way.

 

[pismoe]

seems to me that a smart hetero that caters to gays might also work very well .

 

[Silhouette]

Do you believe a person's religion ends the moment they step over the threshold of a church door and head for their car in the parking lot? How about after? When their car leaves the lot?

Actually, for most of the ones I know it does.

So you want to make your assumption be the platform for removing the 1st Amendment protections for freedom to exercise (not store in a jar) one's faith?

 

[bodecea]

So can a Rabbi refuse to officiate the wedding of two Nazis? Thanks for your help.

Yes.,,,The performance of religious services by members of the Clergy are not covered under Public Accommodation laws.

What makes a clergyman have closer access to the 1st Amendment than a parishioner?

A member of the clergy performing a religoius ceremony as a function of a non-profit religious organization does not fall under Public Accommodation laws that apply to for profit businesses.


>>>>

But if it's a black rabbi who owns a bakery he would have to make a cake for the gay white supremacist who is marrying the gay Islamic Jihadist.

Only if we can watch.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

seems to me that a smart hetero that caters to gays might also work very well .

The point is that if you own, in this case a bakery, you should be able to refuse a customer for whatever reason.

EG. If somebody came in, they were filthy looking and had terrible body odor, as the owner of the bakery you have the right to ask them to leave the premises.

So if you don't agree with the LGTB crowd, and a few of them want a cake baked, as the owner of the bakery you have a right to refuse to bake the cake.

The problem is that people are being bullied and forced into doing things that are against their beliefs, like they have NO rights anymore, if they refuse they're villified and publically trashed and that's wrong on every level.

 

[Silhouette]

The thing is we need to take it from being just wrong to "legally wrong". And that will happen soon.

 

[Iceweasel]

The evidence is that people are being sued for not participating in homosexual events.

The evidence is cities and states have added alternative sexuality to PA laws because the Constitution doesn't provide it.

The evidence is that states are passing laws to protect citizens from participating in the above.

NO ONE can understand it for you. Your stupidity is your problem. To get something like this so wrong proves you cannot grasp simple concepts. Life for you must be hard. I guess that's why you have all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards, who would hire you?

Your stats show 20,000 posts in 3 years, Seawytch's stats show 26,000 posts in 6 years.

Your stat is zero since you missed or couldn't understand the point. Everyone of hers is progay propaganda and I have discussed quite a range of topics. Most of mine are before and after work so no, I don't have all day to post. Pop your head out of your ass or just be another worthless poster. Your call.

You said she has "all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards". I pointed out that you have posted more frequently here than she has. The content of the posts is immaterial to my point, which is that talking about how someone has all day to post on message boards is silly when you post more frequently on the message board where you make that claim.

I haven't posted all day and I am not posting on a singular topic so of course that makes a difference. That's too much for you to understand so I have to reject your stupidity for what it is.

What on earth are you talking about?

I don't care what topics you post about. My only point, as already stated, is that making claims about how much time someone else has to post looks foolish when you post more often than that person. The posting statistics given by this site show you posting more frequently than Seawytch, who you said has "all day every day" to post. It doesn't matter if every one of your posts is on a different subject. You still post more frequently than she does.

I don't what you care about, why would you assume you have any value to me. I explained what I was talking about in uncomplicated language. You can't understand it but that's not my problem.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

I suspect this business will soon face massive fines for things that they would normally overlook. This is why it pays to obey our government at all times. Let it be our master....

 

[pismoe]

seems to me that a smart hetero that caters to gays might also work very well .

The point is that if you own, in this case a bakery, you should be able to refuse a customer for whatever reason.

EG. If somebody came in, they were filthy looking and had terrible body odor, as the owner of the bakery you have the right to ask them to leave the premises.

So if you don't agree with the LGTB crowd, and a few of them want a cake baked, as the owner of the bakery you have a right to refuse to bake the cake.

The problem is that people are being bullied and forced into doing things that are against their beliefs, like they have NO rights anymore, if they refuse they're villified and publically trashed and that's wrong on every level.

------------------------------------ personally I don't mind the public trashing of me but yeah , that how it is going . Worse than that is that some business owners are losing their money and businesses to anti RIGHTS people because of government enforcing laws that disregard the RIGHTS of the business owners Lucy .

 

[Montrovant]

Your stats show 20,000 posts in 3 years, Seawytch's stats show 26,000 posts in 6 years.

Your stat is zero since you missed or couldn't understand the point. Everyone of hers is progay propaganda and I have discussed quite a range of topics. Most of mine are before and after work so no, I don't have all day to post. Pop your head out of your ass or just be another worthless poster. Your call.

You said she has "all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards". I pointed out that you have posted more frequently here than she has. The content of the posts is immaterial to my point, which is that talking about how someone has all day to post on message boards is silly when you post more frequently on the message board where you make that claim.

I haven't posted all day and I am not posting on a singular topic so of course that makes a difference. That's too much for you to understand so I have to reject your stupidity for what it is.

What on earth are you talking about?

I don't care what topics you post about. My only point, as already stated, is that making claims about how much time someone else has to post looks foolish when you post more often than that person. The posting statistics given by this site show you posting more frequently than Seawytch, who you said has "all day every day" to post. It doesn't matter if every one of your posts is on a different subject. You still post more frequently than she does.

I don't what you care about, why would you assume you have any value to me. I explained what I was talking about in uncomplicated language. You can't understand it but that's not my problem.

I understood exactly what you said. You don't want to admit to having made a foolish statement, that's fine.

 

[Iceweasel]

Your stat is zero since you missed or couldn't understand the point. Everyone of hers is progay propaganda and I have discussed quite a range of topics. Most of mine are before and after work so no, I don't have all day to post. Pop your head out of your ass or just be another worthless poster. Your call.

You said she has "all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards". I pointed out that you have posted more frequently here than she has. The content of the posts is immaterial to my point, which is that talking about how someone has all day to post on message boards is silly when you post more frequently on the message board where you make that claim.

I haven't posted all day and I am not posting on a singular topic so of course that makes a difference. That's too much for you to understand so I have to reject your stupidity for what it is.

What on earth are you talking about?

I don't care what topics you post about. My only point, as already stated, is that making claims about how much time someone else has to post looks foolish when you post more often than that person. The posting statistics given by this site show you posting more frequently than Seawytch, who you said has "all day every day" to post. It doesn't matter if every one of your posts is on a different subject. You still post more frequently than she does.

I don't what you care about, why would you assume you have any value to me. I explained what I was talking about in uncomplicated language. You can't understand it but that's not my problem.

I understood exactly what you said. You don't want to admit to having made a foolish statement, that's fine.

No you don't get it and trying to pin your idiocy on me won't work.

 

[pismoe]

seems to me that a smart hetero that caters to gays might also work very well .

The point is that if you own, in this case a bakery, you should be able to refuse a customer for whatever reason.

EG. If somebody came in, they were filthy looking and had terrible body odor, as the owner of the bakery you have the right to ask them to leave the premises.

So if you don't agree with the LGTB crowd, and a few of them want a cake baked, as the owner of the bakery you have a right to refuse to bake the cake.

The problem is that people are being bullied and forced into doing things that are against their beliefs, like they have NO rights anymore, if they refuse they're villified and publically trashed and that's wrong on every level.

--------------------------------------------------------- my thinking also applies to ALL businesses , not just cake bakers but every business everywhere in the USA .

 

[Montrovant]

You said she has "all day every day to post fag propaganda on message boards". I pointed out that you have posted more frequently here than she has. The content of the posts is immaterial to my point, which is that talking about how someone has all day to post on message boards is silly when you post more frequently on the message board where you make that claim.

I haven't posted all day and I am not posting on a singular topic so of course that makes a difference. That's too much for you to understand so I have to reject your stupidity for what it is.

What on earth are you talking about?

I don't care what topics you post about. My only point, as already stated, is that making claims about how much time someone else has to post looks foolish when you post more often than that person. The posting statistics given by this site show you posting more frequently than Seawytch, who you said has "all day every day" to post. It doesn't matter if every one of your posts is on a different subject. You still post more frequently than she does.

I don't what you care about, why would you assume you have any value to me. I explained what I was talking about in uncomplicated language. You can't understand it but that's not my problem.

I understood exactly what you said. You don't want to admit to having made a foolish statement, that's fine.

No you don't get it and trying to pin your idiocy on me won't work.

Do you have some personal knowledge of Seawytch and her employment status, or how she spends her days? Otherwise you said something foolish. It has nothing to do with me, really, other than I pointed it out. If you had just said she is always posting her "fag propaganda", this conversation would never have happened. Instead, you said she has "all day every day" to post, despite the fact that you post more frequently than she does on this board.

Perhaps you should look to your own comprehension if you cannot see that.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Christian B&B isn’t backing down despite $80,000 fine for refusing to host gay wedding

Good don't back down to the economic terrorist acts. Stand strong.

If refusing to provide services of any kind to gay folks is so central to the Christian faith, how do you account for the fact that so many individual Christians would say that what these people are doing is wrong and in fact unchristian? How do you account for the fact that so many Christian churches and denominations welcome gays, and perform same sex marriages ? These facts are proof that these people are using Christianity to mask their ignorant and cruel bigotry .

A majority of Christians support marriage equality
53% of Australian Christians support same-sex marriage.
This is the finding of a Galaxy Research poll which asked 1060 Australians whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry.

The survey also asked about religious affiliation. It found that support for same-sex marriage is:

• 53% among Christians (with 41% opposed)
• 62% among members of other religions (with 30% opposed), and
• 67% among people with no religion (with 24% opposed).