Zone1 Equality is downsizing religions, as parent refuse to downsize their love for an LGBTQ+ or female child.

Let people decide for themselves whether what they do is immoral or sinful. Stop judging since you do not want to be judged.
The whole religious argument about morality is that it comes from a higher power. Or are you arguing that morality is subjective and therefore relative and not absolute?
 
No, it isn't. It can be socially acceptable at a given time, but it can not be biologically normal.

Someone born without legs is not normal. Someone born a psychopath is not normal, and someone born not being into the opposite sex is not normal. Hell my nearsightedness is not normal, but I don't pretend it is.
It is normal for a small percentage of the human population to be homosexual.
 
The baker doesn't put a sign in his bakery saying "no gays allowed". They are already on record as saying they follow PA laws when it comes to non custom items. or even custom items that don't involve SSM, or in this baker's case, even Halloween themed cakes.

Should an atheist be forced to provide a custom Christening cake? I say no.
So it is your argument that no business that provides custom work is beholden to public accommodation laws?

You are wrong of course.

I used to build houses and do custom renovations I could not deny people service because they were gay, Black, etc.

I had my car painted and the auto body shop that did that custom work was still bound by public accommodation laws.

A tailor who makes custom suits cannot deny service because a customer is gay

Should I go on or do you get the point?

When a business advertises that it does custom orders they are still subject to the law.
 
You can deny the facts all you want.

Maybe you need to read up on some psychology and sociology.

And the incidence of psychopathy in the human population is a known percentage that has been verified many times over so once again in the population as a whole it is normal to have a small percentage of that population to exhibit psychopathy.


It occurring doesn't make it normal.
 
Want to know a little secret? Doesnt make it right. That could be why Magic Johnson got his johnson fucked up and he got HIV? Keep marginalizing fudge packing, it makes you look like a typical Joe Biden voter.

View attachment 738574
Right and wrong are subjective.

and I haven't voted for any Democrat or Republican in over 20 years.

You do know that people in long and faithful relationships can engage in just about any sexual act as consenting adults with virtually zero risk of an STD don't you?
 
It occurring doesn't make it normal.
YEs it does.

There has ALWAYS been a small percentage of the human population that are homosexuals.

That by definition means that it is normal for a small percentage of the population to be homosexual.
 
So it is your argument that no business that provides custom work is beholden to public accommodation laws?

You are wrong of course.

I used to build houses and do custom renovations I could not deny people service because they were gay, Black, etc.

I had my car painted and the auto body shop that did that custom work was still bound by public accommodation laws.

A tailor who makes custom suits cannot deny service because a customer is gay

Should I go on or do you get the point?

When a business advertises that it does custom orders they are still subject to the law.

It has to be balanced against a person's right to free exercise, and even then the situation has to be resolved using the least intrusive method of resolving.

Again, the bakers didn't deny services for point of sale work. Even "custom" work on cars is the same thing for pretty much everyone.

The law is subject to the 1st amendment and free exercise.
 
No, you don't get to make subsets for a group to consider the subset "normal" and imply it's normal for the whole group.

When that subset has always existed within the set of all human populations then it is normal for all human population to to have that subset withing the whole
 
It has to be balanced against a person's right to free exercise, and even then the situation has to be resolved using the least intrusive method of resolving.

Again, the bakers didn't deny services for point of sale work. Even "custom" work on cars is the same thing for pretty much everyone.

The law is subject to the 1st amendment and free exercise.
No it doesn't. You just stated that no business that does custom work is beholden to PA laws. You were wrong.

And a wedding cake is pretty much the same thing for all people ordering wedding cakes.

When you can show me in whatever bible you use that your god stated that engaging in business transactions with any sinner is a sin in itself then your argument will hold water. Until then it doesn't

And if you did find that statement of sin t would pretty much prohibit any Christian from opening a business.
 
When that subset has always existed within the set of all human populations then it is normal for all human population to to have that subset withing the whole

And it's still not normal. Or Default, or whatever. Not being attracted to the opposite sex is a pretty big detriment towards being able to pass on your genes to the next generation.
 
No it doesn't. You just stated that no business that does custom work is beholden to PA laws. You were wrong.

And a wedding cake is pretty much the same thing for all people ordering wedding cakes.

When you can show me in whatever bible you use that your god stated that engaging in business transactions with any sinner is a sin in itself then your argument will hold water. Until then it doesn't

And if you did find that statement of sin t would pretty much prohibit any Christian from opening a business.

I am saying that free exercise has to be considered even in PA's but especially in CONTRACTED work of types like wedding cakes you 100% have to account for free exercise.

I don't have to, because that's the beauty of the protected right to free exercise. I guess you just hate the Constitution.

Again, not your call to make, and not the governments unless there is an overriding compelling interest, and even then they have to use the least intrusive method of mitigating the situation.
 
And it's still not normal. Or Default, or whatever. Not being attracted to the opposite sex is a pretty big detriment towards being able to pass on your genes to the next generation.
It is by definition. There have ALWAYS been some human that are attracted to the opposite sex so therefore since it has ALWAYS been it is to that extent normal for some humans.

So you can live in denial of the facts if it make you feel better but you'll still be wrong.

You are arguing social acceptance not the fact of the existence of a thing.
 
I am saying that free exercise has to be considered even in PA's but especially in CONTRACTED work of types like wedding cakes you 100% have to account for free exercise.

I don't have to, because that's the beauty of the protected right to free exercise. I guess you just hate the Constitution.

Again, not your call to make, and not the governments unless there is an overriding compelling interest, and even then they have to use the least intrusive method of mitigating the situation.
If you as a business owner do not want to obey the law then you should not be in business.

There is nothing special about a wedding cake it is just a fucking cake
 
It is by definition. There have ALWAYS been some human that are attracted to the opposite sex so therefore since it has ALWAYS been it is to that extent normal for some humans.

So you can live in denial of the facts if it make you feel better but you'll still be wrong.

You are arguing social acceptance not the fact of the existence of a thing.

And still not normal.

You are equating social acceptance with default biological conditions and normality, not me.

"Normal for them" is a copout.
 
If you as a business owner do not want to obey the law then you should not be in business.

There is nothing special about a wedding cake it is just a fucking cake

Then why force someone to make it when they don't want to?

The law shouldn't force people to violate their right to free exercise without a compelling interest, and even then the situation has to be mitigated using the least instrusive means possible.

You just get off on forcing people to go against their morals as long as you disagree with their morals.
 
I'm not making the decision your god is.

Your god tells you what is and is not a sin. It is not for mere mortals to define sin.
My God tells me that I am prohibited by His Word to define sin for any other person. I am commanded to not sin, that judgement made by me, on me. Therefore, I cannot judge homosexuality as a sin. It might be a sin for me, but not for anyone else.

When Jesus told the prostitute to go and sin no more, it didn't include her running back to the brothel and calling the other girls prostitutes. Leave them be. She however was told to sin no more.

Following that advice, I would not run around telling gays they are sinful. It's not my place nor my judgment to make. My conduct is the only conduct I can judge.

It is a real shame that you cannot understand this rather simple concept. The intense personalty of the concept of sin does escape most. Even though the Bible is quite clear. Do not judge others. Over and over, do not judge others. YOU go and sin no more. Judge yourself. Take the log out of your own eye. Don't complain about the mote in someone else's eye.
 
And still not normal.

You are equating social acceptance with default biological conditions and normality, not me.

"Normal for them" is a copout.
If something has ALWAYS it existed than it is NORMAL for that thing to exist.
 
My God tells me that I am prohibited by His Word to define sin for any other person. I am commanded to not sin, that judgement made by me, on me. Therefore, I cannot judge homosexuality as a sin. It might be a sin for me, but not for anyone else.

When Jesus told the prostitute to go and sin no more, it didn't include her running back to the brothel and calling the other girls prostitutes. Leave them be. She however was told to sin no more.

Following that advice, I would not run around telling gays they are sinful. It's not my place nor my judgment to make. My conduct is the only conduct I can judge.

It is a real shame that you cannot understand this rather simple concept. The intense personalty of the concept of sin does escape most. Even though the Bible is quite clear. Do not judge others. Over and over, do not judge others. YOU go and sin no more. Judge yourself. Take the log out of your own eye. Don't complain about the mote in someone else's eye.

Where in your bible does it state that YOU define what sin is?

You are arguing that morality is subjective and that right and wrong are relative. That contradicts any religious teaching
 

Forum List

Back
Top