Equality and Tolerance: A Purely Objective View

[jillian]

As far as Christian beliefs and homosexuality go, equality is something that both sides need to observe. Tolerance likewise, should work on an equal plane; respect for beliefs on both sides should be equal, but without one or the other sacrificing what they are or believe in for the other. Gay or Christian, it is wrong to bully one or the other into submission. I am a Christian who inherently believes homosexuality is wrong, but on the other hand, what right does that give me to force a homosexual to change him or herself because of it? It isn't my right to change them but God's if he so chooses. He created all of mankind, so it stands to reason that he has the ability to change them as well.

But it also stands to reason that a levelheaded homosexual shouldn't expect a Christian to change what he believes to sate their demands for tolerance and equality either. To change the beliefs anyone in my opinion, changes the essence of who they are. What right does any man or woman have to forcibly mold another person to fit their idyllic views of their society? But back to equality: Forcing a person to serve a homosexual couple against what he/she believes and adheres to is no better than if the converse were true. Forcing someone to exchange their beliefs for the tolerance and acceptance of another set of beliefs is wrong. There is a fine line between service and belief that needs to be addressed.

When running a business means you have to sacrifice your beliefs to keep the peace, what good is running the business? Is this what the founders meant by "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" When you can't run your business and hold on to your beliefs, are you truly happy? Are you being allowed to live your life the way you see fit? If not, then the laws designed by our government to ensure equality among men only breed discord and malcontent from one group to another, and vice versa. As noted author Tom Robbins says about laws: "Laws, it is said, are for the protection of the people. It's unfortunate that there are no statistics on the number of lives that are clobbered yearly as a result of laws: outmoded laws; laws that found their way onto the books as a result of ignorance, hysteria or political haymaking; antilife laws; biased laws; laws that pretend that reality is fixed and nature is definable; laws that deny people the right to refuse protection. A survey such as that could keep a dozen dull sociologists out of mischief for months."

Why must one person's happiness come at the sacrifice of another's?

why on earth do you think your view is objective?

here's the deal… your bigotry has to end at your doorstep.

have a good day.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Sorry but if a gay wants to buy some M&M's from your store you have to sell it to them. And if you, an infidel, go to a store with a muslim manager they have to sell you groceries.

If you don't like it there are several countries in the world experimenting in segregation and discrimination. They are in the middle east and Africa, the most wonderful places in the world

Fine. Let's use your logic here for a moment, applied to everyday things and people. A gay wedding planner must serve heterosexual couples. A gay photographer must photograph heterosexual weddings. A gay baker must make Christian themed cakes and confections for a heterosexual couple or group of heterosexuals. A gay store owner must serve Muslims who are bent on killing them for being gay. A black seamstress must sew KKK garments for Klansmen. A Jewish merchandiser must sell Nazi themed items. The list goes on. Using this logic, anyone with any set of beliefs must be forced to tolerate and serve those who represent the antithesis of their beliefs.

Those countries you speak of would kill, not discriminate against homosexuals. You've gone too far in trying to make a point. Your quest for tolerance and equality will have unintended consequences. Remember my thread about Antonio Darden? He's a gay hairstylist who refused to cut the hair of NM Governor Susana Martinez, because of her views on homosexuality. Yeah, okay, so it's okay for him to do it. But not for a Christian to do the same?

You missed the point by a mile.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Did you even read your own question?

You chose to reinstate institutionalized, government sanctioned, anti-Semitism.

I got it. Maybe others have a different answer.

 

[TemplarKormac]

As far as Christian beliefs and homosexuality go, equality is something that both sides need to observe. Tolerance likewise, should work on an equal plane; respect for beliefs on both sides should be equal, but without one or the other sacrificing what they are or believe in for the other. Gay or Christian, it is wrong to bully one or the other into submission. I am a Christian who inherently believes homosexuality is wrong, but on the other hand, what right does that give me to force a homosexual to change him or herself because of it? It isn't my right to change them but God's if he so chooses. He created all of mankind, so it stands to reason that he has the ability to change them as well.

But it also stands to reason that a levelheaded homosexual shouldn't expect a Christian to change what he believes to sate their demands for tolerance and equality either. To change the beliefs anyone in my opinion, changes the essence of who they are. What right does any man or woman have to forcibly mold another person to fit their idyllic views of their society? But back to equality: Forcing a person to serve a homosexual couple against what he/she believes and adheres to is no better than if the converse were true. Forcing someone to exchange their beliefs for the tolerance and acceptance of another set of beliefs is wrong. There is a fine line between service and belief that needs to be addressed.

When running a business means you have to sacrifice your beliefs to keep the peace, what good is running the business? Is this what the founders meant by "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" When you can't run your business and hold on to your beliefs, are you truly happy? Are you being allowed to live your life the way you see fit? If not, then the laws designed by our government to ensure equality among men only breed discord and malcontent from one group to another, and vice versa. As noted author Tom Robbins says about laws: "Laws, it is said, are for the protection of the people. It's unfortunate that there are no statistics on the number of lives that are clobbered yearly as a result of laws: outmoded laws; laws that found their way onto the books as a result of ignorance, hysteria or political haymaking; antilife laws; biased laws; laws that pretend that reality is fixed and nature is definable; laws that deny people the right to refuse protection. A survey such as that could keep a dozen dull sociologists out of mischief for months."

Why must one person's happiness come at the sacrifice of another's?

why on earth do you think your view is objective?

here's the deal… your bigotry has to end at your doorstep.

have a good day.

My bigotry? What about yours? Forcing Christian proprietors to tolerate and serve people against their beliefs isn't bigotry? Here's the deal, your hypocrisy ends where my rights begin. Don't like it? That's simply too bad.

Remember, don't come crying to the government when the exact same thing is done to you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Interesting. If I ever had the power, perhaps I should force each of you to work against what you believe. Tolerate what you don't accept, believe in what you don't want to believe. Then you yourselves would be howling about how unfair and oppressive it is.

What if a Christian business owner doesn't want to serve Jews?

It's in your power to decide which religion's freedom to protect.

What's your call, and why?

Given that most of Christianity was derived from Judaic principles, to say we would ever refuse service to Jews would be like us discriminating against ourselves. Your argument is one of false equivalency.

Do you need a history lesson in Christian persecution of the Jews?

You won't answer the question because your argument, such as it is, cannot cope with that real life situation.

You've lost the case.

 

[KNB]

Christians are being "forced" to accept gay customers the same way that racist honky diners were "forced" to serve black people in the 1960s.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution explicitly states, "Shove your Bible up your ass."

 

[TemplarKormac]

What if a Christian business owner doesn't want to serve Jews?

It's in your power to decide which religion's freedom to protect.

What's your call, and why?

Given that most of Christianity was derived from Judaic principles, to say we would ever refuse service to Jews would be like us discriminating against ourselves. Your argument is one of false equivalency.

Perhaps but do you doubt that America's Christians once discriminated against Jews, often using the levers of gov't, as a matter of course? Ever heard of Blue Laws? They still exist and are enforced.

Of course I know what Blue Laws are. They restrict the buying and selling of certain merchandise on Sundays. Need I remind you that the Supreme Court ruled Blue Laws to be Constitutional many times, namely in McGowan v. Maryland (1961). And yes, those claiming to be Christians once did discriminate against a wide variety of people. I don't doubt it for one minute.

 

[SAYIT]

As far as Christian beliefs and homosexuality go, equality is something that both sides need to observe. Tolerance likewise, should work on an equal plane; respect for beliefs on both sides should be equal, but without one or the other sacrificing what they are or believe in for the other. Gay or Christian, it is wrong to bully one or the other into submission. I am a Christian who inherently believes homosexuality is wrong, but on the other hand, what right does that give me to force a homosexual to change him or herself because of it? It isn't my right to change them but God's if he so chooses. He created all of mankind, so it stands to reason that he has the ability to change them as well.

But it also stands to reason that a levelheaded homosexual shouldn't expect a Christian to change what he believes to sate their demands for tolerance and equality either. To change the beliefs anyone in my opinion, changes the essence of who they are. What right does any man or woman have to forcibly mold another person to fit their idyllic views of their society? But back to equality: Forcing a person to serve a homosexual couple against what he/she believes and adheres to is no better than if the converse were true. Forcing someone to exchange their beliefs for the tolerance and acceptance of another set of beliefs is wrong. There is a fine line between service and belief that needs to be addressed.

When running a business means you have to sacrifice your beliefs to keep the peace, what good is running the business? Is this what the founders meant by "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" When you can't run your business and hold on to your beliefs, are you truly happy? Are you being allowed to live your life the way you see fit? If not, then the laws designed by our government to ensure equality among men only breed discord and malcontent from one group to another, and vice versa. As noted author Tom Robbins says about laws: "Laws, it is said, are for the protection of the people. It's unfortunate that there are no statistics on the number of lives that are clobbered yearly as a result of laws: outmoded laws; laws that found their way onto the books as a result of ignorance, hysteria or political haymaking; antilife laws; biased laws; laws that pretend that reality is fixed and nature is definable; laws that deny people the right to refuse protection. A survey such as that could keep a dozen dull sociologists out of mischief for months."

Why must one person's happiness come at the sacrifice of another's?

why on earth do you think your view is objective?

here's the deal… your bigotry has to end at your doorstep.

have a good day.

My bigotry? What about yours? Forcing Christian proprietors to tolerate and serve people against their beliefs isn't bigotry?

Yeah, no it's not. I know you feel strongly about this and I think your passion has blurred your rationality. Tolerance and equality are important concepts in America and if you can't deal with others employing those concepts perhaps you should not engage publicly.

 

[NYcarbineer]

As far as Christian beliefs and homosexuality go, equality is something that both sides need to observe. Tolerance likewise, should work on an equal plane; respect for beliefs on both sides should be equal, but without one or the other sacrificing what they are or believe in for the other. Gay or Christian, it is wrong to bully one or the other into submission. I am a Christian who inherently believes homosexuality is wrong, but on the other hand, what right does that give me to force a homosexual to change him or herself because of it? It isn't my right to change them but God's if he so chooses. He created all of mankind, so it stands to reason that he has the ability to change them as well.

But it also stands to reason that a levelheaded homosexual shouldn't expect a Christian to change what he believes to sate their demands for tolerance and equality either. To change the beliefs anyone in my opinion, changes the essence of who they are. What right does any man or woman have to forcibly mold another person to fit their idyllic views of their society? But back to equality: Forcing a person to serve a homosexual couple against what he/she believes and adheres to is no better than if the converse were true. Forcing someone to exchange their beliefs for the tolerance and acceptance of another set of beliefs is wrong. There is a fine line between service and belief that needs to be addressed.

When running a business means you have to sacrifice your beliefs to keep the peace, what good is running the business? Is this what the founders meant by "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" When you can't run your business and hold on to your beliefs, are you truly happy? Are you being allowed to live your life the way you see fit? If not, then the laws designed by our government to ensure equality among men only breed discord and malcontent from one group to another, and vice versa. As noted author Tom Robbins says about laws: "Laws, it is said, are for the protection of the people. It's unfortunate that there are no statistics on the number of lives that are clobbered yearly as a result of laws: outmoded laws; laws that found their way onto the books as a result of ignorance, hysteria or political haymaking; antilife laws; biased laws; laws that pretend that reality is fixed and nature is definable; laws that deny people the right to refuse protection. A survey such as that could keep a dozen dull sociologists out of mischief for months."

Why must one person's happiness come at the sacrifice of another's?

why on earth do you think your view is objective?

here's the deal… your bigotry has to end at your doorstep.

have a good day.

My bigotry? What about yours? Forcing Christian proprietors to tolerate and serve people against their beliefs isn't bigotry? Here's the deal, your hypocrisy ends where my rights begin. Don't like it? That's simply too bad.

Remember, don't come crying to the government when the exact same thing is done to you.

What if the belief itself is bigotry? What if the belief itself, when exercised, commits an act against someone in violation of HIS rights not to be victimized by bigotry?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Christians are being "forced" to accept gay customers the same way that racist honky diners were "forced" to serve black people in the 1960s.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution explicitly states, "Shove your Bible up your ass."

You're kidding.

The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law that respects religion, nor prohibits someone from exercising it therein. Guess what Public Accommodation laws do, buddy? They violate the First Amendment rights of anyone of faith being made to serve people against their beliefs.

 

[KNB]

Christians are being "forced" to accept gay customers the same way that racist honky diners were "forced" to serve black people in the 1960s.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution explicitly states, "Shove your Bible up your ass."

You're kidding.

The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law that respects religion, nor prohibits someone from exercising it therein. Guess what Public Accommodation laws do, buddy? They violate the First Amendment rights of anyone of faith being made to serve people against their beliefs.

Anyone of faith can fuck off back to Candyland with Leprechaun Jesus and his flying entourage of tooth fairy angels. You don't have the religious freedom to vote your stupid bedtime stories into public law.

 

[TemplarKormac]

why on earth do you think your view is objective?

here's the deal… your bigotry has to end at your doorstep.

have a good day.

My bigotry? What about yours? Forcing Christian proprietors to tolerate and serve people against their beliefs isn't bigotry?

Yeah, no it's not. I know you feel strongly about this and I think your passion has blurred your rationality. Tolerance and equality are important concepts in America and if you can't deal with others employing those concepts perhaps you should not engage publicly.

Easily countered.

Tolerance and equality are indeed important concepts in America, but if you cant deal with others practicing their beliefs in their own business, maybe you are the one who shouldn't publicly engage or do business with them. My rationality is just fine. It's this double standard on tolerance and equality that I'm having an issue with.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Given that most of Christianity was derived from Judaic principles, to say we would ever refuse service to Jews would be like us discriminating against ourselves. Your argument is one of false equivalency.

Perhaps but do you doubt that America's Christians once discriminated against Jews, often using the levers of gov't, as a matter of course? Ever heard of Blue Laws? They still exist and are enforced.

Of course I know what Blue Laws are. They restrict the buying and selling of certain merchandise on Sundays. Need I remind you that the Supreme Court ruled Blue Laws to be Constitutional many times, namely in McGowan v. Maryland (1961). And yes, those claiming to be Christians once did discriminate against a wide variety of people. I don't doubt it for one minute.

Then why did you attempt that comical obfuscation in response to my post?

Again, if a Christian business refuses to serve Jews, and the Jews file a discrimination suit,

and YOU HAVE THE POWER to the decide the case based on your principles alone (a concept that you introduced into the thread)

who do decide for? Whose right do you uphold?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Christians are being "forced" to accept gay customers the same way that racist honky diners were "forced" to serve black people in the 1960s.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution explicitly states, "Shove your Bible up your ass."

You're kidding.

The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law that respects religion, nor prohibits someone from exercising it therein. Guess what Public Accommodation laws do, buddy? They violate the First Amendment rights of anyone of faith being made to serve people against their beliefs.

Anyone of faith can fuck off back to Candyland with Leprechaun Jesus and his flying entourage of tooth fairy angels. You don't have the religious freedom to vote your stupid bedtime stories into public law.

You don't have the right to force your secular laws on the religious either, buddy.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Perhaps but do you doubt that America's Christians once discriminated against Jews, often using the levers of gov't, as a matter of course? Ever heard of Blue Laws? They still exist and are enforced.

Of course I know what Blue Laws are. They restrict the buying and selling of certain merchandise on Sundays. Need I remind you that the Supreme Court ruled Blue Laws to be Constitutional many times, namely in McGowan v. Maryland (1961). And yes, those claiming to be Christians once did discriminate against a wide variety of people. I don't doubt it for one minute.

Then why did you attempt that comical obfuscation in response to my post?

Again, if a Christian business refuses to serve Jews, and the Jews file a discrimination suit,

and YOU HAVE THE POWER to the decide the case based on your principles alone (a concept that you introduced into the thread)

who do decide for? Whose right do you uphold?

What on Earth are you talking about? You're drawing up impossible scenarios in an attempt to stump any attempts at an answer. If I had the power to decide that case. I wouldn't. The Christian is entitled to his beliefs, and the Jew is entitled to take his business elsewhere. My time would be better spent deciding cases that actually meant something to the country, things like government excess for example. By the way, my response wasn't designed to be "comical" it was a statement of fact that went right over your head.

 

[SAYIT]

Given that most of Christianity was derived from Judaic principles, to say we would ever refuse service to Jews would be like us discriminating against ourselves. Your argument is one of false equivalency.

Perhaps but do you doubt that America's Christians once discriminated against Jews, often using the levers of gov't, as a matter of course? Ever heard of Blue Laws? They still exist and are enforced.

Of course I know what Blue Laws are. They restrict the buying and selling of certain merchandise on Sundays. Need I remind you that the Supreme Court ruled Blue Laws to be Constitutional many times, namely in McGowan v. Maryland (1961). And yes, those claiming to be Christians once did discriminate against a wide variety of people. I don't doubt it for one minute.

I'm not concerned with how the Supreme Court has dealt with Blue Laws but rather how good American Christians have used not just their religion as an excuse to discriminate but even the levers of gov't. The point being we are moving beyond the days of socially and legally acceptable bigotry and discrimination and we are a better people for it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Christians are being "forced" to accept gay customers the same way that racist honky diners were "forced" to serve black people in the 1960s.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution explicitly states, "Shove your Bible up your ass."

You're kidding.

The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law that respects religion, nor prohibits someone from exercising it therein. Guess what Public Accommodation laws do, buddy? They violate the First Amendment rights of anyone of faith being made to serve people against their beliefs.

They are not made to serve anyone. They have the right not to choose to operate a business if non-discrimination laws related to business would require them to violate religious beliefs they consider inviolable.

No one in America is allowed to use religion as a device to rewrite the law in any way they choose.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Interesting. If I ever had the power, perhaps I should force each of you to work against what you believe. Tolerate what you don't accept, believe in what you don't want to believe. Then you yourselves would be howling about how unfair and oppressive it is.

Look up the word hypocrite and your photo will be there.

Do you ever think about what you write?

Jeezus, someone needs to slap some sense into you.

 

[KNB]

You're kidding.

The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law that respects religion, nor prohibits someone from exercising it therein. Guess what Public Accommodation laws do, buddy? They violate the First Amendment rights of anyone of faith being made to serve people against their beliefs.

Anyone of faith can fuck off back to Candyland with Leprechaun Jesus and his flying entourage of tooth fairy angels. You don't have the religious freedom to vote your stupid bedtime stories into public law.

You don't have the right to force your secular laws on the religious either, buddy.

Actually, we do. We have that right because we are not governed by your fairy tales. So when you braindead talking monkeys start jabbering on about your imaginary friend in the sky dictating your mangled interpretation of morality to the general public, We the People have the right to tell you to fuck off because the First Amendment says so.

You do not have the right to vote your ridiculous fairy tales into public law.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Of course I know what Blue Laws are. They restrict the buying and selling of certain merchandise on Sundays. Need I remind you that the Supreme Court ruled Blue Laws to be Constitutional many times, namely in McGowan v. Maryland (1961). And yes, those claiming to be Christians once did discriminate against a wide variety of people. I don't doubt it for one minute.

Then why did you attempt that comical obfuscation in response to my post?

Again, if a Christian business refuses to serve Jews, and the Jews file a discrimination suit,

and YOU HAVE THE POWER to the decide the case based on your principles alone (a concept that you introduced into the thread)

who do decide for? Whose right do you uphold?

What on Earth are you talking about? You're drawing up impossible scenarios in an attempt to stump any attempts at an answer. If I had the power to decide that case. I wouldn't. The Christian is entitled to his beliefs, and the Jew is entitled to take his business elsewhere. My time would be better spent deciding cases that actually meant something to the country, things like government excess for example. By the way, my response wasn't designed to be "comical" it was a statement of fact that went right over your head.

Your time better spent? You started the thread.

Okay, you're the second one in the thread to endorse government sanctioned anti-Semitism.

Let me for the record say I don't, so the score so far is two conservatives for anti-Semitism,

one liberal against anti-Semitism.