Do You Support LGBT Or Not?

[Syriusly]

I am opposed to the lgbt tactics of in your face intimidation, their endless lawsuits and their intolerances toward others viewpoints. I am in favor of them keeping their sex lives out of politics. The bakers suffering turned the tide for me.

"endless lawsuits"? The only 'endless lawsuits were by gay couples fighting for their right to legally marry- and ultimately they won.

No one is to blame for the 'bakers suffering' other than the bakers- bakers are required to follow the law like everyone else.

And Christians in particular. The Bible doesn't say anywhere not to bake a cake for gays- but the New Testament says specifically for Christians to obey authority- obey the law.
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

 

[Syriusly]

Sil, this may come as a shock to you, but Melissa Joan Hart is neither a teenager nor a witch. lol

Damn her and her Witch agenda!

 

[Syriusly]

No, I'm opposed to PA laws as well. My example served to illustrate to those in favor of them to force Christians to worship at the altar of LGBT, that there is another side to that coin.

So you are opposed to laws which require a business to serve a customer even if he is black or Jewish?

 

[Syriusly]

Your position is quite plain. You want bakers to have a right to refuse to bake a cake for a same sex marriage, but compell them by law to do so for all others. Even if they don't want to do so. You have to bake a cake for a Jewish wedding or an interfaith marriage regardless of your beleifs. Funny how those deeply held religious beliefs don't matter to hypocrites. Shut up and bake the wedding cake...unless it is for homos. lol

Well then I'm sure you'll be supportive of laws forcing gay billboard makers to HAVE TO print HUGE highway signs for a Christian customer that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God". If they decline for personal objection to content, the Christians may then sue them for bigotry and discrimination; citing public accommodation laws....

Those laws are already in place.

Except they don't apply only to gays- as you seem to want them to- they apply to every business.

A business can't refuse to serve a Christian just because he is a Christian.

Why does that bother you?

 

[ChrisL]

I don't have any problem with PA laws, equal rights for gays, etc. My problem is when I am called a "bigot" or other nasty names because I don't accept that a biological man is really a woman. That imposes on MY freedom of thought. I don't buy into this transgender nonsense. I strongly believe it is a mental illness/body dysmorphic syndrome, and some of them that I have seen in real life or talked to on message boards for myself are obviously just batshit crazy.

 

[Syriusly]

LGBT is on a collision course with Christianity. Our society will have to choose.

Most Christians disagree. Of course for bigots like you, you will just call any Christian you disagree with 'not a Christian'- but hell- I know lots of evangelicals that don't think Catholics are real Christians either. Christians are a funny lot.

Christians have far, far, far more legal protection in the United States than homosexual Americans. Not only that, it is not homosexuals that have been leading a campaign of persecution for decades, but Christians, leading a campaign to persecute homosexuals. Now that you can't- well you call that persecution of Christians.

 

[Silhouette]

I don't have any problem with PA laws, equal rights for gays, etc. My problem is when I am called a "bigot" or other nasty names because I don't accept that a biological man is really a woman. That imposes on MY freedom of thought. I don't buy into this transgender nonsense. I strongly believe it is a mental illness/body dysmorphic syndrome, and some of them that I have seen in real life or talked to on message boards for myself are obviously just batshit crazy.

Well Syriusly? mdk? What say you?

 

[Silhouette]

Well then I'm sure you'll be supportive of laws forcing gay billboard makers to HAVE TO print HUGE highway signs for a Christian customer that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God". If they decline for personal objection to content, the Christians may then sue them for bigotry and discrimination; citing public accommodation laws....

A business can't refuse to serve a Christian just because he is a Christian.

Why does that bother you?

Oh golly, well you know that's not what we're talking about, is it? If a gay walked into a bakery and ordered a dozen doughnuts to go and the baker said "no, I won't sell to you because you're a homosexual". That would be discrimination. If a gay walked into a bakery and said "I want you to build a cake with two men getting married as part of the design" and the baker said "no, I can't be a part of a gay wedding because it is against my faith". That is the 1st Amendment protecting that Christian.

Likewise, if LGBT applied for tax-exempt status and declared itself the religion it factually is, then if a Christian walked into a gay billboard designer and said "make me a sign that says "Bob's used cars, next exit" and the gay said "no, I won't make signs for a Christian", that would be discrimination. If the Christian instead said "make me a sign that says "homosexuality is a sin unto God" and the gay said "no, that's against my beliefs", then that would be the 1st Amendment protecting a Church of LGBT member.

 

[mdk]

I don't have any problem with PA laws, equal rights for gays, etc. My problem is when I am called a "bigot" or other nasty names because I don't accept that a biological man is really a woman. That imposes on MY freedom of thought. I don't buy into this transgender nonsense. I strongly believe it is a mental illness/body dysmorphic syndrome, and some of them that I have seen in real life or talked to on message boards for myself are obviously just batshit crazy.

I don't think you're a bigot in the least. You don't go out of your way to be an asshole to people or craft wild ass stories to smear members of LGBT community like Silhouette. I don't call many people a bigot b/c the word is so vastly and foolishly over used; however, in Sil's case she is the very soul of the word.

 

[Syriusly]

I don't have any problem with PA laws, equal rights for gays, etc. My problem is when I am called a "bigot" or other nasty names because I don't accept that a biological man is really a woman. That imposes on MY freedom of thought. I don't buy into this transgender nonsense. I strongly believe it is a mental illness/body dysmorphic syndrome, and some of them that I have seen in real life or talked to on message boards for myself are obviously just batshit crazy.

Well Syriusly? mdk? What say you?

I am not calling Chris a bigot.

She is welcome to her own opinion just so long as she is not advocating for discrimination.

 

[Syriusly]

Well then I'm sure you'll be supportive of laws forcing gay billboard makers to HAVE TO print HUGE highway signs for a Christian customer that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God". If they decline for personal objection to content, the Christians may then sue them for bigotry and discrimination; citing public accommodation laws....

A business can't refuse to serve a Christian just because he is a Christian.

Why does that bother you?

Oh golly, well you know that's not what we're talking about, is it? If a gay walked into a bakery and ordered a dozen doughnuts to go and the baker said "no, I won't sell to you because you're a homosexual". That would be discrimination. If a gay walked into a bakery and said "I want you to build a cake with two men getting married as part of the design" and the baker said "no, I can't be a part of a gay wedding because it is against my faith". That is the 1st Amendment protecting that Christian..

Oh golly well you know that is not true.

If a Jew walked into a bakery and ordered a dozen doughnuts to go and the baker said 'no, I won't sell to you because you're homosexual" that would indeed be discrimination.

And if a Jew walked into a bakery and ordered a bar mitzvah cake and the baker refused to bake it, saying that it is against my faith, that would also be a violation of the public accommodation laws.

Just as if a mixed race couple walked into a bakery and the baker refused to bake them a wedding cake, claiming that their wedding would be against my faith.

Christians don't get special exemptions from the law.

 

[WillowTree]

I am opposed to the lgbt tactics of in your face intimidation, their endless lawsuits and their intolerances toward others viewpoints. I am in favor of them keeping their sex lives out of politics. The bakers suffering turned the tide for me.

"endless lawsuits"? The only 'endless lawsuits were by gay couples fighting for their right to legally marry- and ultimately they won.

No one is to blame for the 'bakers suffering' other than the bakers- bakers are required to follow the law like everyone else.

And Christians in particular. The Bible doesn't say anywhere not to bake a cake for gays- but the New Testament says specifically for Christians to obey authority- obey the law.
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

And yet we allow Muslim taxi drivers to refuse service to those people who have liquor or a dog. We allow Muslims to refuse to run pork product through the scanner at the grocery, someone else has to do it. But you fucking moron liberals will hold the Christians accountable. See what a fucking hypocrite you are?

 

[WillowTree]

Well then I'm sure you'll be supportive of laws forcing gay billboard makers to HAVE TO print HUGE highway signs for a Christian customer that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God". If they decline for personal objection to content, the Christians may then sue them for bigotry and discrimination; citing public accommodation laws....

A business can't refuse to serve a Christian just because he is a Christian.

Why does that bother you?

Oh golly, well you know that's not what we're talking about, is it? If a gay walked into a bakery and ordered a dozen doughnuts to go and the baker said "no, I won't sell to you because you're a homosexual". That would be discrimination. If a gay walked into a bakery and said "I want you to build a cake with two men getting married as part of the design" and the baker said "no, I can't be a part of a gay wedding because it is against my faith". That is the 1st Amendment protecting that Christian..

Oh golly well you know that is not true.

If a Jew walked into a bakery and ordered a dozen doughnuts to go and the baker said 'no, I won't sell to you because you're homosexual" that would indeed be discrimination.

And if a Jew walked into a bakery and ordered a bar mitzvah cake and the baker refused to bake it, saying that it is against my faith, that would also be a violation of the public accommodation laws.

Just as if a mixed race couple walked into a bakery and the baker refused to bake them a wedding cake, claiming that their wedding would be against my faith.

Christians don't get special exemptions from the law.

Yes, but it seems Muslims do.

 

[ChrisL]

I am opposed to the lgbt tactics of in your face intimidation, their endless lawsuits and their intolerances toward others viewpoints. I am in favor of them keeping their sex lives out of politics. The bakers suffering turned the tide for me.

"endless lawsuits"? The only 'endless lawsuits were by gay couples fighting for their right to legally marry- and ultimately they won.

No one is to blame for the 'bakers suffering' other than the bakers- bakers are required to follow the law like everyone else.

And Christians in particular. The Bible doesn't say anywhere not to bake a cake for gays- but the New Testament says specifically for Christians to obey authority- obey the law.
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

And yet we allow Muslim taxi drivers to refuse service to those people who have liquor or a dog. We allow Muslims to refuse to run pork product through the scanner at the grocery, someone else has to do it. But you fucking moron liberals will hold the Christians accountable. See what a fucking hypocrite you are?

I don't agree with that either. Muslims should not be able to discriminate against people when it comes to doing business. They should be held to the same standards as any other public accommodation business. If they refuse to do their jobs, they should be fired, but the difference there is these are employees and that is not necessarily a "policy" of the particular business in general. Instead it is an individual thing. I still don't agree though. If you refuse to do your job duties equally to everyone, then you should lose your job, whether they Muslim, Christian, straight, homosexual, atheist, or whatever.

 

[Silhouette]

In Kim Davis' case, she had her job BEFORE the illegal Obergefell Ruling. So did she take the job knowing her beliefs would interfere with it? No. Yet she was punished for that not-knowing. She had to make a choice. She chose her faith. And none of it was her fault. Yet she was put in jail.

She should sue the state of Kentucky and the federal government who forced KY officials to put her in jail for a law that was newly written (not interpreted...there is no language about guaranteeing marriage in the Constitution, nor protections for just some weird sexual fetishes) by SCOTUS instead of the Legislature.

Anyone who has been harmed by gays forcing them to participate in "gay weddings" should sue in exactly the same way. Ask the fed for clarification on where it Found language in the Constitution guaranteeing marriage to all (polygamists though, still can't marry) and/or language granting civil rights to people doing just some (but not other) weird sexual behaviors...

 

[mdk]

In Kim Davis' case, she had her job BEFORE the illegal Obergefell Ruling. So did she take the job knowing her beliefs would interfere with it? No. Yet she was punished for that not-knowing. She had to make a choice. She chose her faith. And none of it was her fault. Yet she was put in jail.

She should sue the state of Kentucky and the federal government who forced KY officials to put her in jail for a law that was newly written (not interpreted...there is no language about guaranteeing marriage in the Constitution, nor protections for just some weird sexual fetishes) by SCOTUS instead of the Legislature.

Anyone who has been harmed by gays forcing them to participate in "gay weddings" should sue in exactly the same way. Ask the fed for clarification on where it Found language in the Constitution guaranteeing marriage to all (polygamists though, still can't marry) and/or language granting civil rights to people doing just some (but not other) weird sexual behaviors...

Kim Davis doesn't get use the power of her elected office to deny citizens their rights based on her religious beliefs. Funny how she never stopped divorces from occurring as a result of her faith. Apparently God's law has sorts of exemptions when it becomes an inconvenience.

Davis did sue and she was rebuffed every step of the way. Gay marriage is still legal in KY and gays can still marry in her county. Too bad, so sad.

 

[Syriusly]

I am opposed to the lgbt tactics of in your face intimidation, their endless lawsuits and their intolerances toward others viewpoints. I am in favor of them keeping their sex lives out of politics. The bakers suffering turned the tide for me.

"endless lawsuits"? The only 'endless lawsuits were by gay couples fighting for their right to legally marry- and ultimately they won.

No one is to blame for the 'bakers suffering' other than the bakers- bakers are required to follow the law like everyone else.

And Christians in particular. The Bible doesn't say anywhere not to bake a cake for gays- but the New Testament says specifically for Christians to obey authority- obey the law.
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.

And yet we allow Muslim taxi drivers to refuse service to those people who have liquor or a dog. We allow Muslims to refuse to run pork product through the scanner at the grocery, someone else has to do it. But you fucking moron liberals will hold the Christians accountable. See what a fucking hypocrite you are?

No- you are fucking ignorant idiot.

You don't have a clue what public accommadation laws are other than what you are fed by the Right wing nut job blogs.

Muslim Taxi drivers have to follow the same laws as anyone else. Any taxi driver can refuse to carry a passenger with a dog- except a service dog. That is illegal and that was the case you probably heard about- and guess what- just like the 'bakery' blind customers have filed complaints against those taxi drivers.

A blind Canadian man has filed a complaint with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission after he says he was denied service from taxi drivers who would not transport him and his guide dog for religious reasons.

So no- a Muslim taxi driver and a Christian baker cannot refuse service to a customer based upon their religious beliefs. And that is absolutely correct.

As far as "allowing Muslims to refuse to run pork product through a scanner" - that doesn't have anything to do with public accommodation laws but does have to do with employment law which tells employers that they should make reasonable accommodations for religious practices- whether a store can- and will accomodate a Muslim- or Jewish employee who doesn't want to handle pork products is up to the store.

I believe that Muslims and Christians- and Gays(of any religion) should all be held to the same public accommodation standards and should follow the law.

If you don't- then you are the fucking hypocrite- and you are absolutely- an idiot.

 

[Silhouette]

Kim Davis doesn't get use the power of her elected office to deny citizens their rights based on her religious beliefs. Funny how she never stopped divorces from occurring as a result of her faith. Apparently God's law has sorts of exemptions when it becomes an inconvenience.

Davis did sue and she was rebuffed every step of the way. Gay marriage is still legal in KY and gays can still marry in her county. Too bad, so sad.

I didn't think Kim Davis was Catholic. Most protestant religions allow divorce if differences cannot be reconciled, for peace. In fact, wasn't the Church of England formed to allow Henry VIII to divorce? Yes, I think it was. A man and wife dividing because they hate each other is less of an affront to God than ransacking the nuclear family altogether and calling one of two men "mom".. Lying is worse than divorce.

 

[Syriusly]

Well then I'm sure you'll be supportive of laws forcing gay billboard makers to HAVE TO print HUGE highway signs for a Christian customer that say "Homosexuality is a sin unto God". If they decline for personal objection to content, the Christians may then sue them for bigotry and discrimination; citing public accommodation laws....

A business can't refuse to serve a Christian just because he is a Christian.

Why does that bother you?

Oh golly, well you know that's not what we're talking about, is it? If a gay walked into a bakery and ordered a dozen doughnuts to go and the baker said "no, I won't sell to you because you're a homosexual". That would be discrimination. If a gay walked into a bakery and said "I want you to build a cake with two men getting married as part of the design" and the baker said "no, I can't be a part of a gay wedding because it is against my faith". That is the 1st Amendment protecting that Christian..

Oh golly well you know that is not true.

If a Jew walked into a bakery and ordered a dozen doughnuts to go and the baker said 'no, I won't sell to you because you're homosexual" that would indeed be discrimination.

And if a Jew walked into a bakery and ordered a bar mitzvah cake and the baker refused to bake it, saying that it is against my faith, that would also be a violation of the public accommodation laws.

Just as if a mixed race couple walked into a bakery and the baker refused to bake them a wedding cake, claiming that their wedding would be against my faith.

Christians don't get special exemptions from the law.

Yes, but it seems Muslims do.

No they don't actually. A Muslim can have the very same complaint filed against him- a Gay Muslim could have a complaint filed against him for refusing to serve a Christian.

There are Muslims who violate public accommodation laws- and they should be treated exactly the same as anyone else who violates them.

Now if you agree- then you also agree I am sure that the Bakery deserves no special exemptions.

 

[Syriusly]

In Kim Davis' case, she had her job BEFORE the illegal Obergefell Ruling. So did she take the job knowing her beliefs would interfere with it? No. Yet she was punished for that not-knowing. She had to make a choice. She chose her faith. And none of it was her fault. Yet she was put in jail.
\...

It was her fault because she refused to follow a court order. It is called contempt of court. She not only refused to participate- she ordered those who worked for her to refuse to participate.

She made her choice- and went against her Christian faith

Romans
13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.