Christian bakers who refused to make cake for homosexual "wedding" break gag order

[Silhouette]

Silhouette will never stop arguing that government can deny behaviors- like religion and marriage.

So, polygamy is legal is what you're saying? Either that are we both are saying marriage has limitations. And who should decide those limitations? Five people in DC or 300 million sovereign citizens in the 50 states?

Next the Kleins will be sued for refusing to place a groom, a bride, another bride, another bride and another bride on a wedding cake for their "new customers"..

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

And same sex marriage is protected by the 14 th amendment

Your religion does not agree with gay marriage....choose a religion that does and sell some cakes

Where, specifically? Where are human behaviors outside religion protected specific to two people of the same gender forcing children to not have either a mother or father for life? Do you believe, in your wildest imagination, that our forefathers meant for you to use the Constitution's wording to set up a situation that is de facto child abuse? Are States Legally Obligated to Defy Obergefell (2015)? Silhouette vs the 50 States.

The founding fathers never meant for you vote either. Now fuck off and fix me a sammich! lol

"Now fuck off and fix me a sammich! lol"

Hey you didn't tell them if that's with or without Mayo

Spicy mustard with lots of seeds, please. Nom!

Hey did you tell him to hold the salami

Or hide the salami ......Uh-Oh

 

[Inevitable]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

 

[Inevitable]

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

Who cares about Leviticus? It's just stories and rules in a book we are not required to follow.

Your stupidity is showing.

All you can do is attack. Real mature.

 

[Inevitable]

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

Who cares about Leviticus? It's just stories and rules in a book we are not required to follow.

I am always amused by Christians who quote Leviticus when it comes to homosexuality- but somehow don't feel compelled to follow any of the other rules of Leviticus.

They don't follow the bible they just use it when it's convenient

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

What's wrong with sex worship? Nothing.

 

[Silhouette]

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

You're aware that Christians don't follow the Old Testament right? They only use it as a historical reference whose "mandates" were revised by the coming of their Messiah Jesus Christ. Were you unaware of that?

So if you want to discuss the Bible with respect to gays, keep it in the New Testament. For reference, Romans 1 and Jude 1. Of note that the issue was important enough to God to be first in both Gospels. Have a read when you get a minute and leave your discussions of stoning and sex worship to the Old Testament. Remember Jesus said "he who is without sin cast the first stone"? Jesus was against stoning. Jesus was also against the spread of homosexual culture. Jude was his closest servant and confidant. Jude reported the mandate of God, one of the few draws from the Old Testament where Jesus said "Yeah, the thing about homosexual culture spreading? They got that one right in the past. It's a bad deal. Don't do it. Remember Sodom was destroyed and all the souls complicit with it"...

My suspicion on why that particular law of God came forward from the Old Testament is that God, being wiser than men, realized that the testing grounds of man needs some type of structure. Men and women after all have their very unique functions, faults and strong points. So each soul born into each body has to undergo those trials within a firm structure.

You go turning that structure into a boneless amorphic pile of goo and there is no "building" within which anyone can get purchase to learn what they need to learn. It's not that God is against humping, it's that God is against the destruction of the purpose of men and women. In fact, it is even referred to in this way in Romans "the purpose of". Some mysteries of God have to be kept from humans. But it is a double-edge sword because in keeping them mysterious, God runs the risk of having humans say "well there's not any real justification for not doing such and such if it feels good!". So instead God puts out mandates and the blessed follow them. The damned do not. "You have to just trust me on this one..." would be the message I think.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Nope.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

You're aware that Christians don't follow the Old Testament right? They only use it as a historical reference whose "mandates" were revised by the coming of their Messiah Jesus Christ. Were you unaware of that?

So if you want to discuss the Bible with respect to gays, keep it in the New Testament. For reference, Romans 1 and Jude 1. Of note that the issue was important enough to God to be first in both Gospels. Have a read when you get a minute and leave your discussions of stoning and sex worship to the Old Testament. Remember Jesus said "he who is without sin cast the first stone"? Jesus was against stoning. Jesus was also against the spread of homosexual culture. Jude was his closest servant and confidant. Jude reported the mandate of God, one of the few draws from the Old Testament where Jesus said "Yeah, the thing about homosexual culture spreading? They got that one right in the past. It's a bad deal. Don't do it. Remember Sodom was destroyed and all the souls complicit with it"...

Chritians should follow both old and new. The Law in the Old Testament points our sin out to us. In the New Testament we are given a way of redemption. The Law still applies, it is just that we are not saved by the law.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

 

[rightwinger]

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

So is adultery

I don't see anyone refusing to bake a cake for adulterers

 

[AmericanFirst1]

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

Who cares about Leviticus? It's just stories and rules in a book we are not required to follow.

I am always amused by Christians who quote Leviticus when it comes to homosexuality- but somehow don't feel compelled to follow any of the other rules of Leviticus.

I am always amused at non Christians using the Bible to, falsely, to defend their sick perversions like homosexuality.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

So is adultery

I don't see anyone refusing to bake a cake for adulterers

Adulterers don't run around flaunting their sexual perversion in everyone's face. When faggots run around looking like funny side show rejects they get what is coming to them.

 

[Silhouette]

So is adultery

I don't see anyone refusing to bake a cake for adulterers

The New Testament, the one Christians follow, is specific about not the individual sinner, but the spread of the homosexual culture itself. Read Jude 1. Adulterers, if they came in saying "we intend to marry and then cheat on each other constantly" and gave that type of "marriage" a name....like "open marriage" or "swingers marriage" would get the same reception at the Klein's bakery I suspect.

The Keins are not allowed to promote the spread of a sin as a movement; while at the same time if a hungry gay person came in and wanted to buy a cupcake to eat or an adulterer came in to buy a scone, the bakery would not be supporting a movement, only a man. Read Jude 1.

 

[Inevitable]

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

The bible wasn't written in English and the words that were translated into homosexual are malakos and arsenokoite. The first word means soft or weak. The second word was made up by Paul. It also didn't mean homosexual. It meant a male prostitute used in temple sex rituals.

 

[Inevitable]

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

So is adultery

I don't see anyone refusing to bake a cake for adulterers

Adulterers don't run around flaunting their sexual perversion in everyone's face. When faggots run around looking like funny side show rejects they get what is coming to them.

No they don't. Well some may, but many adulterers do as well.

 

[rightwinger]

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

So is adultery

I don't see anyone refusing to bake a cake for adulterers

Adulterers don't run around flaunting their sexual perversion in everyone's face. When faggots run around looking like funny side show rejects they get what is coming to them.

Ummm...yes they do
They cheat in public flaunting their adultery

Why would you bake a cake for a known adulterer?

 

[Syriusly]

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

Who cares about Leviticus? It's just stories and rules in a book we are not required to follow.

I am always amused by Christians who quote Leviticus when it comes to homosexuality- but somehow don't feel compelled to follow any of the other rules of Leviticus.

I am always amused at non Christians using the Bible to, falsely, to defend their sick perversions like homosexuality.

Hey I am glad I can amuse those who are ignorant of the Bible!

 

[SassyIrishLass]

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Wrong again.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

The bible wasn't written in English and the words that were translated into homosexual are malakos and arsenokoite. The first word means soft or weak. The second word was made up by Paul. It also didn't mean homosexual. It meant a male prostitute used in temple sex rituals.

Mhm....it's a sin and an abomination.

 

[Syriusly]

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

Leviticus 18 verse 22, read it to know you are wrong.

Those are bible verses. You think they are wrong?

when taken out of context to support lies they are used incorrectly. The retard who posted them is wrong.

You're taking Leviticus 18:22 out of context. It was referring to temple prostitution and sex worship.

I'm not wrong

Romans 1: 26-27. Homosexuality is a sin throughout the Bible

So is adultery

I don't see anyone refusing to bake a cake for adulterers

Adulterers don't run around flaunting their sexual perversion in everyone's face. When faggots run around looking like funny side show rejects they get what is coming to them.

Should a Christian baker have refused to bake a wedding cake for Donald and his third wife's wedding?