Freedom of Religion? Christian Artists Face Jail Time For Not Making Same-Sex Wedding Invitations

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Why not make them but do a bad job and collect the money

 

[Nosmo King]

Eerily reminiscent of all other repressed groups in this nation's history. That's why that big statue of Justice wears a blindfold. Society's hatred, fears and predjudices get checked at the door to the courthouse.

It USED to wear a blindfold...that hasn't been for quite a while as Justice in this nation has been corrupted - the blindfold has been replaced with 'liberal-colored' glasses.

Spoken like someone who would be comfortable with Jim Crow laws.

WRONG.

Again you are confusing government mandated discrimination with choices of conceive by non essential business people.

In fact, PA laws that do not allow any form of moral dissent are far more like Jim Crow laws then what you are implying.

What? You're saying that including everyone is more restrictive than segregating one demographic?

No, what I am saying is that the desire to force inclusiveness regardless of the actual harm done is just as wrong as forcing exclusiveness to perpetuate actual harm.

Government force is the common element here, and is not justified in either case.

Actual harm does ne. Please expand on that. To my knowledge, these merchants are in business to provide goods and services. It is what they want to do. How is turning away customers a harm to their endeavors?

 

[easyt65]

Again, lets say the country swings more liberal in years to come and suddenly pedophilia, bestiality, or necrophilia become legal....are liberals going to threaten Americans who do not want to engage, facilitate / enable / such activities if those engaging in these things declare they are offended by that refusal based on religious beliefs?!

Oh stop it. Comparing homosexuality to the strongest taboos in our culture is rubbish. Come up with a believable argument.

I am not doing so, as you should recognize - I am making a point that just because something is made legal by the government does not mean Christians or others should be forced to forfeit their religious beliefs regarding those things...which, again, is why we have the Constitutionally protected freedom of religion and the practice of that religion.

 

[Syriusly]

Where in the bible does it say one cannot print words on a piece of paper for gay people? Their business is NOT a religion

The bible states homosexuality is a sin, and the bible states Christians should not partake in, support, or encourage sinning. Obeying the teachings of their faith is exercising the freedom of their religion. Exercising their freedom affects how they do business..

The Bible never says two men getting married is a sin. Nor does it say that two women getting married is a sin.

But the Bible does say that a man divorcing his wife- and remarrying- say for the third time- is guilty of the sin of adultery.

And the Bible does say that Christians are supposed to follow 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. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

Why do so called Christians keep wanting to violate the law in contravention of the Bible's instructions?

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

This is about hate, and has NOTHING to do with religion.

Selling a commercial product for money is not a religious rite.

where do you get your ghey cards and cakes made?

 

[BlindBoo]

If you're in business, refusing to do business with someone based on their sexual orientation is not a protected constitutional right. (And at least in certain areas, that type of discrimination is illegal.)

It is not their sexual orientation but the practice of homosexuality, which is a sin, as per the bible.

You have the constitutional right to believe that. You don't have the right to force that belief on others who do not believe as you do, if you are doing business in a community that has laws against it.

It's not that we don't serve fat people we just don't want to encourage gluttony, it's a sin.

 

[Syriusly]

I do want to point out that these 'artists' haven't been threatened by anyone.

No one sued them.
No one has accused them of violating the law.
They haven't even claimed to have refused to make any invitations.

They are the ones who have filed suit.

Against the very same law that says business's must do business with these artists, even if their religious belief says that they should not serve Christians.

 

[kaz]

Without religious freedom, the artists retain artistic freedom that should be unassailable. This compulsion to control artistic creation is pure evil.

Religion has nothing to do with it. It's the scope of services provided by the merchant.

I am a Christian. The basic tenant of my faith is the Golden Rule.

If you're really use force to compel an artist to design something for you for any reason rather then just going to another artist, then you are a sick fuck indeed and there is nothing "Christian" about doing that.

The Golden Rule is meant to be a guide to you how to treat others. It wasn't a hammer for you to hold your breath and demand your way

Compel under force! My oh my! And here I thought that is what these merchants were in business for!

But, here we come to find that these merchants are in business to discriminate and unnecessarily humiliate other people under the guise of religious freedom. The world turned upside down. Religion means suspicion and fear. Freedom means the right to discriminate. And justice means the protection to demean and refuse services because of who you happen to be.

Threatening to put people in jail is not compelling under force? Seriously?

Nowhere did I say they should or shouldn't serve the queers. I said it's not a legitimate use of government power. And just so you know, it's not a legitimate use of Christianity either, faux-Christian. Christianity should be how you make yourself a better person, not what you use to condemn others.

As for your using religion as a basis of judging people, you're just further demonstrating your lack of grasp of Christianity. Also you're showing yourself to be a hypocrite as you are doing exactly what you claim to be the most against in conservative Christians.

How I lived my life when I was a business owner was serving all customers as long as they pay their bills and are courteous to my staff. I worked with Republican and Democrat politicos. We did a lot of work for Planned Parenthood, they paid their bills. You're the bigot you say you're against

 

[kaz]

If you're in business, refusing to do business with someone based on their sexual orientation is not a protected constitutional right. (And at least in certain areas, that type of discrimination is illegal.)

It is not their sexual orientation but the practice of homosexuality, which is a sin, as per the bible.

You have the constitutional right to believe that. You don't have the right to force that belief on others who do not believe as you do, if you are doing business in a community that has laws against it.

It's not that we don't serve fat people we just don't want to encourage gluttony, it's a sin.

You people are so twisted. You are the only ones forcing people to do anything

 

[Syriusly]

'Two Arizona Christian artists face the possibility of being jailed, in addition to being fined, after they recently refused to make invitations for a same-sex wedding.'

Ummmm...did we go to bed and suddenly wake up in Communist Russia, China, or North Korea?

Liberals have been pushing the GLBT Lifestyle on everyone as 'the norm', except it ISN'T to many Americans, especially those who have a religious objection to it. Those religious beliefs - and the practice of them - are actually PROTECTED by the Constitution:

Hmm what does the Phoenix law actually say?

Phoenix Municipal Code Section 18-4 Prohibited acts.

Discrimination in public Accommodations

Discrimination in places of public accommodation against any person because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability is contrary to the policy of the City of Phoenix

 

[martybegan]

It USED to wear a blindfold...that hasn't been for quite a while as Justice in this nation has been corrupted - the blindfold has been replaced with 'liberal-colored' glasses.

Spoken like someone who would be comfortable with Jim Crow laws.

WRONG.

Again you are confusing government mandated discrimination with choices of conceive by non essential business people.

In fact, PA laws that do not allow any form of moral dissent are far more like Jim Crow laws then what you are implying.

What? You're saying that including everyone is more restrictive than segregating one demographic?

No, what I am saying is that the desire to force inclusiveness regardless of the actual harm done is just as wrong as forcing exclusiveness to perpetuate actual harm.

Government force is the common element here, and is not justified in either case.

Actual harm does ne. Please expand on that. To my knowledge, these merchants are in business to provide goods and services. It is what they want to do. How is turning away customers a harm to their endeavors?

They want to provide a good or service, but not towards a ceremony they find morally wrong. At that point you have to consider both sides, not just automatically say "the religious people have to knuckle under, because I hate them".

In this case you have a non-necessary, non time sensitive, service to be rendered, one easily found with another vendor. Why does a gay persons butt hurt over not getting the invite from one vendor override automatically the religious person's butt hurt over having to provide a service for a ceremony they don't agree with?

 

[martybegan]

'Two Arizona Christian artists face the possibility of being jailed, in addition to being fined, after they recently refused to make invitations for a same-sex wedding.'

Ummmm...did we go to bed and suddenly wake up in Communist Russia, China, or North Korea?

Liberals have been pushing the GLBT Lifestyle on everyone as 'the norm', except it ISN'T to many Americans, especially those who have a religious objection to it. Those religious beliefs - and the practice of them - are actually PROTECTED by the Constitution:

Hmm what does the Phoenix law actually say?

Phoenix Municipal Code Section 18-4 Prohibited acts.

When people are arguing that the law is wrong, or wrongly applied, quoting said law is merely a dodge to the actual argument.

 

[kaz]

Again, lets say the country swings more liberal in years to come and suddenly pedophilia, bestiality, or necrophilia become legal....are liberals going to threaten Americans who do not want to engage, facilitate / enable / such activities if those engaging in these things declare they are offended by that refusal based on religious beliefs?!

Oh stop it. Comparing homosexuality to the strongest taboos in our culture is rubbish. Come up with a believable argument.

Government forcing one citizen to do with another is an extreme authoritarian position. Government was supposed to be a tool of protecting citizens from each other, not a tool for government to oppress it's citizens

 

[martybegan]

Why not make them but do a bad job and collect the money

Because some people have principles.

 

[OldLady]

Again, lets say the country swings more liberal in years to come and suddenly pedophilia, bestiality, or necrophilia become legal....are liberals going to threaten Americans who do not want to engage, facilitate / enable / such activities if those engaging in these things declare they are offended by that refusal based on religious beliefs?!

Oh stop it. Comparing homosexuality to the strongest taboos in our culture is rubbish. Come up with a believable argument.

I am not doing so, as you should recognize - I am making a point that just because something is made legal by the government does not mean Christians or others should be forced to forfeit their religious beliefs regarding those things...which, again, is why we have the Constitutionally protected freedom of religion and the practice of that religion.

Your point was that legalizing homosexuality will lead us down the slippery slope to disgusting taboo behavior. That is not believable. I am in full agreement that businesses should not discriminate against gays, but I also feel uncomfortable about all this pushing and shoving over the laws. Maybe someone who is a homosexual can explain why they must make a HUGE DEAL out of it every time they find a Christian who is unwilling to provide services surrounding their wedding. Refusing to rent to them would be a different matter. No argument. This wedding thing is a quagmire.

 

[Syriusly]

Spoken like someone who would be comfortable with Jim Crow laws.

WRONG.

Again you are confusing government mandated discrimination with choices of conceive by non essential business people.

In fact, PA laws that do not allow any form of moral dissent are far more like Jim Crow laws then what you are implying.

What? You're saying that including everyone is more restrictive than segregating one demographic?

No, what I am saying is that the desire to force inclusiveness regardless of the actual harm done is just as wrong as forcing exclusiveness to perpetuate actual harm.

Government force is the common element here, and is not justified in either case.

Actual harm does ne. Please expand on that. To my knowledge, these merchants are in business to provide goods and services. It is what they want to do. How is turning away customers a harm to their endeavors?

They want to provide a good or service, but not towards a ceremony they find morally wrong. At that point you have to consider both sides, not just automatically say "the religious people have to knuckle under, because I hate them".

In this case you have a non-necessary, non time sensitive, service to be rendered, one easily found with another vendor. Why does a gay persons butt hurt over not getting the invite from one vendor override automatically the religious person's butt hurt over having to provide a service for a ceremony they don't agree with?

In this case you have no case at all- no one has accused this pair of doing anything- no 'gay person' is butt hurt- these two are butt hurt because they don't want to comply with the law- a law no one has accused them of violating.

This is not a law that requires this pair to serve gays- this is a law that tells them that they cannot discriminate against persons because of their race, or color, or religion, or gender, or marital status, or sexual orientation or disability.

This same law says that no business can refuse to serve them because they are women.
This same law says that no business can refuse to serve the one of them that is not married, because she is not married.
This same law says that no business can refuse to serve either of them just because they are Christians.

Why do Christians believe that they don't have to follow the same law everyone else has to follow?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

'Two Arizona Christian artists face the possibility of being jailed, in addition to being fined, after they recently refused to make invitations for a same-sex wedding.'

Ummmm...did we go to bed and suddenly wake up in Communist Russia, China, or North Korea?

Liberals have been pushing the GLBT Lifestyle on everyone as 'the norm', except it ISN'T to many Americans, especially those who have a religious objection to it. Those religious beliefs - and the practice of them - are actually PROTECTED by the Constitution:

"The Free Exercise Clause is the accompanying clause with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:

“ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

What do the Liberal / LGBT 'Nazi's' not understand about that?!

Liberals can argue all day long about how it's discrimination, but it's not. It is one's personal religious belief, part of their faith, and THAT, again, is protected by the Constitution.

So Liberals are going to demand everyone else comply with their demands, regardless of what the Constitution says, and if the individuals refuse they are going to judicially punish them?!

This is an example of WHY we have the Constitution, why we have the Bill of Rights - to protect us from tyranny that encroaches on our personal rights!

I am NOT comparing these, but let's say in the future somehow liberals ram a law onto the books allowing Pedophilia, Bestiality, or Necrophilia? If Christians refuse to participate in any part of those, even if it has been approved by the government, will the government move to punish Christians - to jail Christians - for exercising their Constitutional Right to exercise their religion?
(-- Pretty ironic since this nation only exists because of a people who left England so they could freely exercise their religion without Government oppression, condemnation, and control.)

I understand laws against discrimination - I do, and I do support them....but I draw the line here. The Constitution clearly states, again:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

The government, however, is encroaching more and more on our rights while justifying doing so more and more. Doing so, allowing it to be done, is the start down a very dangerous road (IMO).


TOPIC:
Christian artists face jail time for refusing to make same-sex wedding invitations

SUPPORTING:
Free Exercise Clause - Wikipedia

The Constitution doesn't protect human sacrifice no matter how religious someone might claim it is.

Nobody claims it does. Jesus....

 

[Syriusly]

[Q Maybe someone who is a homosexual can explain why they must make a HUGE DEAL out of it every time they find a Christian who is unwilling to provide services surrounding their wedding..

Once again- no 'homosexual' is making a huge deal here- it is 2 Christians who are making a 'huge deal' here because they don't think that they should have to comply with the law.

 

[Syriusly]

If you're in business, refusing to do business with someone based on their sexual orientation is not a protected constitutional right. (And at least in certain areas, that type of discrimination is illegal.)

It is not their sexual orientation but the practice of homosexuality, which is a sin, as per the bible.

You have the constitutional right to believe that. You don't have the right to force that belief on others who do not believe as you do, if you are doing business in a community that has laws against it.

It's not that we don't serve fat people we just don't want to encourage gluttony, it's a sin.

You people are so twisted. You are the only ones forcing people to do anything

Americans have been 'forced' to sell to blacks, Jews, Christians and Mexicans for over 50 years.
This is no different.

 

[easyt65]

Americans have been 'forced' to sell to blacks, Jews, Christians and Mexicans for over 50 years.
This is no different.

As usual, you are wrong. One is racism NOT supported by the Bible or biblical teachings while one is.