Christian churches ‘must be made’ to affirm homosexuality

[WorldWatcher]

really? Cite them

The legal requirement that Christians back cakes for queers, but queers need not bake cakes for Christians.

Public Accommodation laws require that a bakery owned by homosexuals cannot refuse service based on the religion of the customer.

So a homosexual baker that offers wedding cakes to the public cannot refuse customer based on the fact they are Christian but then provide the same goods and services say to Jews, Muslims, and Hindus.



>>>>

{
A Colorado baker that found herself ensnared in controversy after refusing to prepare cakes decorated with anti-gay messages can now breathe deeply.

The Colorado Civil Rights Division ruled that Marjorie Silva, owner of Denver's Azucar Bakery, did not discriminate against William Jack when she refused to prep two bible-shaped cakes with anti-gay imagery and phrases like "God hates gays" written in icing, ABC 7 News Denver is reporting.}

Colorado s Azucar Bakery Did Not Discriminate By Refusing To Bake Anti-Gay Cakes Court Rules

Turns out we have one law for the Hated Christians, and a VERY different law for our cherished queers.

Public Accommodation laws require that a bakery owned by homosexuals cannot refuse service based on the religion of the customer.

The baker was willing to provide the cake, but not a derogatory message on the cake.

So a homosexual baker that offers wedding cakes to the public cannot refuse customer based on the fact they are Christian but then provide the same goods and services say to Jews, Muslims, and Hindus.



Why do you assume the baker was homosexual?


>>>>

 

[ogibillm]

really? Cite them

The legal requirement that Christians back cakes for queers, but queers need not bake cakes for Christians.

Public Accommodation laws require that a bakery owned by homosexuals cannot refuse service based on the religion of the customer.

So a homosexual baker that offers wedding cakes to the public cannot refuse customer based on the fact they are Christian but then provide the same goods and services say to Jews, Muslims, and Hindus.



>>>>

{
A Colorado baker that found herself ensnared in controversy after refusing to prepare cakes decorated with anti-gay messages can now breathe deeply.

The Colorado Civil Rights Division ruled that Marjorie Silva, owner of Denver's Azucar Bakery, did not discriminate against William Jack when she refused to prep two bible-shaped cakes with anti-gay imagery and phrases like "God hates gays" written in icing, ABC 7 News Denver is reporting.}

Colorado s Azucar Bakery Did Not Discriminate By Refusing To Bake Anti-Gay Cakes Court Rules

Turns out we have one law for the Hated Christians, and a VERY different law for our cherished queers.

you have a incorrect interpretation of the courts ruling.

 

[WorldWatcher]

In the original assault on liberty, the lesbians were offered a wedding cake for sale, the bakery simply wouldn't cater the wedding.

False.

In neither the Sweetcakes by Melissa case (Oregon) or the Masterpiece Cakes case (Colorado) was there any discussion about cake design or any offer of selling a wedding cake to the customers. As soon as the store owners found out it was for a same-sex wedding they refused to sell a wedding cake.

Those are uncontested facts that were agreed to by the store owners.

BOLI-sweetcakes.pdf
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/initial_decision_case_no._cr_2013-0008.pdf


>>>>

 

[Uncensored2008]

Christians also led the fight for rascism.

That's a big lie meme, as you no doubt know.

I just get tired of this partisan ignorance of history.

Yes- the Confederacy was essentially a Democratic government- and a Conservative government.

The big lie used by democrats is that the Confederacy was "conservative," in what way?

Did the democrats promote individual liberty? (obviously not.) Did they oppose government intrusion into private business (intestate slave act). Were the advocates of low taxation (free holder tax)? Did they demand a repeal of government regulation (Negro containment act, free holder planting mandates.)

I realize that the goal is to tell this outrageous lie so often that no one questions it, but can you answer how the democrats of the Antebellum South were anything other than anti-liberty, big government, tax and spend democrats just like you and the other dims?

Christians led the fight against slavery- and Christians also led the fight for slavery.

Christians fought on the front lines for slavery and fought on the front lines against slavery.

Pretending Christians were only on the side against slavery and racism is either a lie- or ignorance.

Speaking of lies and ignorance...

 

[Uncensored2008]

you have a incorrect interpretation of the courts ruling.

Hmmm, so you read "some animals are far more equal that others" in a different way?

 

[ogibillm]

you have a incorrect interpretation of the courts ruling.

Hmmm, so you read "some animals are far more equal that others" in a different way?

look, you can't understand that refusing to sell a product to anyone is different than choosing who you will sell it to based on sexual orientation.

if you can't understand that very obvious distinction you are clearly living in a fantasy world where facts don't matter and truthiness conquers all.

how's the weather there?

 

[Uncensored2008]

In the original assault on liberty, the lesbians were offered a wedding cake for sale, the bakery simply wouldn't cater the wedding.

False.

In neither the Sweetcakes by Melissa case (Oregon) or the Masterpiece Cakes case (Colorado) was there any discussion about cake design or any offer of selling a wedding cake to the customers. As soon as the store owners found out it was for a same-sex wedding they refused to sell a wedding cake.

Those are uncontested facts that were agreed to by the store owners.

BOLI-sweetcakes.pdf
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/initial_decision_case_no._cr_2013-0008.pdf


>>>>

{Phillips informed Complainants that he does not create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings. Phillips told the men, “I’ll make you birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.”}

Try again.

Just like the queer baker did, Phillips offered a cake decorated in a way that did not offend his views.

Unfortunately for him, he is lesser in the eyes of the law due to his religion.

 

[candycorn]

I think the churches should just go on pretending that homosexuality doesn't exist and they will be blissfully happy in the same way that a 2 year old knows nothing about cancer, axe murderers, or the big bad wolf.

 

[ogibillm]

In the original assault on liberty, the lesbians were offered a wedding cake for sale, the bakery simply wouldn't cater the wedding.

False.

In neither the Sweetcakes by Melissa case (Oregon) or the Masterpiece Cakes case (Colorado) was there any discussion about cake design or any offer of selling a wedding cake to the customers. As soon as the store owners found out it was for a same-sex wedding they refused to sell a wedding cake.

Those are uncontested facts that were agreed to by the store owners.

BOLI-sweetcakes.pdf
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/initial_decision_case_no._cr_2013-0008.pdf


>>>>

{Phillips informed Complainants that he does not create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings. Phillips told the men, “I’ll make you birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.”}

Try again.

Just like the queer baker did, Phillips offered a cake decorated in a way that did not offend his views.

Unfortunately for him, he is lesser in the eyes of the law due to his religion.

decorations were not part of the discussion.

that was the crux of what WorldWatcher posted.

you have a very hard time with facts, don't you?

 

[Syriusly]

Christians also led the fight for rascism.

That's a big lie meme, as you no doubt know.
..

Feel free to prove me wrong.

As has been pointed out- Jefferson Davis invoked God when seceding from the Union. Southern ministers regularly preached that slavery was god's will. The KKK claimed that they were Christians and started off each meeting with a Christian prayer.

This is not an indictment of Christianity- the majority of soldiers and politicians and citizens in the North and South were regular Christian church goers- but it is an indictment of those who want to claim that Christians led the fight against racism without acknowledging that other Christians led the fight for racism.

Don't believe me? Maybe you would believe the Southern Baptists Convention?

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) – The Southern Baptist Convention is taking its biggest step to date to confront the legacy of support for slavery and segregation that still looms over the denomination.


The two-day “Gospel and Racial Reconciliation” summit in Nashville wasn’t a how-to seminar on making churches more diverse; it wasn’t long on solutions. It was more of a call to arms, with speaker after speaker proclaiming the evil of racial divisions.


Southern Baptists discuss race slavery and segregation New Pittsburgh Courier

 

[ogibillm]

I think the churches should just go on pretending that homosexuality doesn't exist and they will be blissfully happy in the same way that a 2 year old knows nothing about cancer, axe murderers, or the big bad wolf.

two problems.

1. homosexuality does exist
2. churches, or more accurately church goers, aren't ignoring it.

but i don't disagree with the sentiment. even if they hold it to be a sin christian teaching says we are all sinners. i don't understand why homosexuals get all the extra scrutiny.

 

[Syriusly]

Christians also led the fight for rascism.

That's a big lie meme, as you no doubt know.

I just get tired of this partisan ignorance of history.

Yes- the Confederacy was essentially a Democratic government- and a Conservative government.

The big lie used by democrats is that the Confederacy was "conservative," in what way?

Did the democrats promote individual liberty? (obviously not.) Did they oppose government intrusion into private business (intestate slave act). Were the advocates of low taxation (free holder tax)? Did they demand a repeal of government regulation (Negro containment act, free holder planting mandates.)

I realize that the goal is to tell this outrageous lie so often that no one questions it, but can you answer how the democrats of the Antebellum South were anything other than anti-liberty, big government, tax and spend democrats just like you and the other dims?
e...

'Conservative' as in 'not wanting to change'
Conservative
1. The inclination, especially in politics, to maintain the existing or traditional order.
2. A political philosophy or attitude that emphasizes respect for traditional institutions and opposes the attempt to achieve social change though legislation or publicly funded programs.
3. Caution or moderation, as in behavior or outlook.

The Democrats of the Confederacy were 'pro-states' rights and opposed a strong Federal government- sound familiar?

 

[candycorn]

I think the churches should just go on pretending that homosexuality doesn't exist and they will be blissfully happy in the same way that a 2 year old knows nothing about cancer, axe murderers, or the big bad wolf.

two problems.

1. homosexuality does exist
2. churches, or more accurately church goers, aren't ignoring it.

but i don't disagree with the sentiment. even if they hold it to be a sin christian teaching says we are all sinners. i don't understand why homosexuals get all the extra scrutiny.

You see, some sins are much greater than others. Baking a cake for a girl who kisses another girl....well you're likely to get hit by a holy lightning bolt. Other lesser sins such as taking the lord's name in vain....your cable may go out for a few seconds.

 

[paperview]

Christians also led the fight for rascism.

That's a big lie meme, as you no doubt know.
..

Feel free to prove me wrong.

As has been pointed out- Jefferson Davis invoked God when seceding from the Union. Southern ministers regularly preached that slavery was god's will. The KKK claimed that they were Christians and started off each meeting with a Christian prayer.

This is not an indictment of Christianity- the majority of soldiers and politicians and citizens in the North and South were regular Christian church goers- but it is an indictment of those who want to claim that Christians led the fight against racism without acknowledging that other Christians led the fight for racism.

Don't believe me? Maybe you would believe the Southern Baptists Convention?

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) – The Southern Baptist Convention is taking its biggest step to date to confront the legacy of support for slavery and segregation that still looms over the denomination.


The two-day “Gospel and Racial Reconciliation” summit in Nashville wasn’t a how-to seminar on making churches more diverse; it wasn’t long on solutions. It was more of a call to arms, with speaker after speaker proclaiming the evil of racial divisions.


Southern Baptists discuss race slavery and segregation New Pittsburgh Courier

Yup.

The Southern Baptists Convention -- the largest Protestant denomination in the US - the world's largest Baptist denomination -- split back then because of what?

Slavery. Which they were fer.

They owe their roots to the ground-shattering schism over slavery.

And only a few years ago, apologized for their stance on slavery and segregation.

 

[The Rabbi]

Sure it does, you're too busy quacking about things you obliviously are clueless about to even realize what the op ed is saying. You're just another "look at how smart I am" left loon trying to impress and failing miserably at it

You've already had your ass smashed by better posters than I on this thread, loopy.

Don't cry about it.

Actually every poster on this thread is a better one than you, dunce-o. And no, the Lass has not had her ass smashed. That woul dbe you.
Are you denying that the op ed doesnt suggest churches be coerced in their teachings?

The op claims a first amendment conflict, which means government would be involved.

The op-ed does not call for government intervention. The op then is at best misleading.

That is too kind- the op-ed is a lie.

Not only that, I'm reminded of the conservative Op-ed columnist from the conservative National Review who thought Chelsea Clinton and her whole family should be be assassinated in 2001.

Like an Op-Edder is the be-all and end-all.

Link?

 

[Uncensored2008]

decorations were not part of the discussion.

that was the crux of what WorldWatcher posted.

you have a very hard time with facts, don't you?

Phillips offered to sell a cake - just as the lesbian did. Phillips simply would not put on the cake what the queer couple wanted - just as the lesbian would not put on the cake what the Christian wanted.

However, Christians have lesser protection under the law, so the outcome was radically different.

Queers have a higher standing under the law.

 

[Syriusly]

decorations were not part of the discussion.

that was the crux of what WorldWatcher posted.

you have a very hard time with facts, don't you?

Queers have a higher standing under the law.

No clearly 'queers' have a higher understanding of the law than you do.

 

[paperview]

You've already had your ass smashed by better posters than I on this thread, loopy.

Don't cry about it.

Actually every poster on this thread is a better one than you, dunce-o. And no, the Lass has not had her ass smashed. That woul dbe you.
Are you denying that the op ed doesnt suggest churches be coerced in their teachings?

The op claims a first amendment conflict, which means government would be involved.

The op-ed does not call for government intervention. The op then is at best misleading.

That is too kind- the op-ed is a lie.

Not only that, I'm reminded of the conservative Op-ed columnist from the conservative National Review who thought Chelsea Clinton and her whole family should be be assassinated in 2001.

Like an Op-Edder is the be-all and end-all.

Link?

The National Review, after keeping it online for years and years, finally deleted it. It was pretty disgusting.

Here is Sullivan quoting a piece of it:

DERBYSHIRE AWARD WINNER 2001: "Chelsea is a Clinton.

She bears the taint; and though not prosecutable in law, in custom and nature the taint cannot be ignored. All the great despotisms of the past � I�m not arguing for despotism s a principle, but they sure knew how to deal with potential trouble � recognized that the families of objectionable citizens were a continuing threat. In Stalin�s penal code it was a crime to be the wife or child of an �enemy of the people. The Nazis used the same principle, which they called Sippenhaft, �clan liability�. In Imperial China, enemies of the state were punished �to the ninth degree�; that is, everyone in the offender�s own generation would be killed, and everyone related via four generations down, to the great-great-grandparents, would also be killed.

� � John Derbyshire, in National Review Online."

www.AndrewSullivan.com - Daily Dish

Do your own research from here, rabbitboy. No surprise you never heard of it.

 

[WorldWatcher]

In the original assault on liberty, the lesbians were offered a wedding cake for sale, the bakery simply wouldn't cater the wedding.

In the original assault on liberty, the lesbians were offered a wedding cake for sale, the bakery simply wouldn't cater the wedding.

False.

In neither the Sweetcakes by Melissa case (Oregon) or the Masterpiece Cakes case (Colorado) was there any discussion about cake design or any offer of selling a wedding cake to the customers. As soon as the store owners found out it was for a same-sex wedding they refused to sell a wedding cake.

Those are uncontested facts that were agreed to by the store owners.

BOLI-sweetcakes.pdf
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/initial_decision_case_no._cr_2013-0008.pdf


>>>>

{Phillips informed Complainants that he does not create wedding cakes for same-sex weddings. Phillips told the men, “I’ll make you birthday cakes, shower cakes, sell you cookies and brownies, I just don’t make cakes for same-sex weddings.”}

Try again.

Just like the queer baker did, Phillips offered a cake decorated in a way that did not offend his views.

Unfortunately for him, he is lesser in the eyes of the law due to his religion.

What you said before was that they would sell them a wedding cake - not some other type of cake.

You were wrong. They would not sell them a wedding cake.


In addition the says "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations" (quoting the Colorado law since you use Phillips). It says "full and equal" not a subset to one group that is normally offered to anyone else. That fact they may have sold them a cupcake or birthday cake is irrelevant.


>>>>

 

[ogibillm]

decorations were not part of the discussion.

that was the crux of what WorldWatcher posted.

you have a very hard time with facts, don't you?

Phillips offered to sell a cake - just as the lesbian did. Phillips simply would not put on the cake what the queer couple wanted - just as the lesbian would not put on the cake what the Christian wanted.

However, Christians have lesser protection under the law, so the outcome was radically different.

Queers have a higher standing under the law.

You either cannot or will not grasp the basic facts, which is again why i said there is no discussion to be had. You are unable or unwilling to deal in reality