Here's why religious restoration acts are repressive

[Nosmo King]

First, no harm befalls a merchant when servicing same sex weddings and affairs. The immortal souls of merchants is not at risk by doing business. Providing the exact same services to both heterosexual and homosexual weddings does not endanger anyone's soul.

The claim that is does stems not from the basic tenets of the faith, but from dogma. The basic tenets of Christianity maintain love for your neighbor, not judging lest ye be judged and those without sin should cast the first stone. But the notion that baking a cake of arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt is a notion born from peculiar dogma. I'm a Christian and if the fear of servicing homosexual customers in the same manner every other customer is not part of the liturgical teachings in my church. If serving homosexuals was so grave a danger businesses would fear for the standing of their souls, that would be universal among Christians.

What these Religious Restoration Acts do is provide legal cover for repressive bigotry. And that also flies in the face of the basic American tenets of faith: all men are created equal and they are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[Ernie S.]

No, baking a cake or arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is not sinful and corrupt. The same sex marriage is sinful and corrupt. Enabling it and participating in it should be voluntary.
Or should we force people who are against capital punishment for religious reasons to prepare the execution room?

 

[Katzndogz]

You don't get to redefine Christian beliefs to suit yourself or your agenda.

 

[Nosmo King]

If concerns for the status of your soul are so high as to use discrimination just to preserve it, wouldn't it then follow that merchants with such concerns should vet each and every customer for their morality and intensions? Would it be morally preferable to cater the wedding of a mafia princess to a homosexual couple? Should a baker be concerned that the wedding cake he just delivered was for that notorious teacher from two counties over who seduced her students?

In fact, there is no Mercantile Imprimatur required for a marriage to take place. The baker exceeds his mandate by judging customers unworthy because of gender orientation or sexual orientation. The merchants are using an extraordinary set of judgments and moral templates for some customers, yet over looking the transgressions of others. .

 

[Nosmo King]

No, baking a cake or arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt. The same sex marriage is sinful and corrupt. Enabling it and participating in it should be voluntary.
Or should we force people who are against capital punishment for religious reasons to prepare the execution room?

Baking and floral arraigning are not holy rites or sacramental rituals. They are, in fact, the stock and trade of merchants who happen to be bakers and florists.

 

[Nosmo King]

You don't get to redefine Christian beliefs to suit yourself or your agenda.

Tell that to the merchants. Because that is precisely what they are doing.

 

[Katzndogz]

The baker is not judging the customer unworthy. The baker is not committing a sin himself. A baker might bake a wedding cake for a teacher accused of molesting students and still refuse to deliver a cake to an underage orgy.

You see this as an issue of the merchant judging the customer where he is really judging himself and refusing to commit what that merchant considers a sin.

When the government redefines religion in its own image and decides what beliefs people should have then there is no separation of the church from the state. The state has seized control of religion and dictates what others should believe and what they should do in accordance with that belief.

 

[Katzndogz]

You don't get to redefine Christian beliefs to suit yourself or your agenda.

Tell that to the merchants. Because that is precisely what they are doing.

No. They are conducting their affairs in accordance with what they believe. Not imposing on anyone else.

 

[Ernie S.]

No, baking a cake or arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt. The same sex marriage is sinful and corrupt. Enabling it and participating in it should be voluntary.
Or should we force people who are against capital punishment for religious reasons to prepare the execution room?

Baking and floral arraigning are not holy rites or sacramental rituals. They are, in fact, the stock and trade of merchants who happen to be bakers and florists.

Yes they are and compromising your religious beliefs should be voluntary. I think civil unions are fine but homosexual marriages are an abomination. I refuse to participate in an abomination. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Nosmo King]

The baker is not judging the customer unworthy. The baker is not committing a sin himself. A baker might bake a wedding cake for a teacher accused of molesting students and still refuse to deliver a cake to an underage orgy.

You see this as an issue of the merchant judging the customer where he is really judging himself and refusing to commit what that merchant considers a sin.

When the government redefines religion in its own image and decides what beliefs people should have then there is no separation of the church from the state. The state has seized control of religion and dictates what others should believe and what they should do in accordance with that belief.

But the merchants are making that determination with homosexual couples only. Had the merchant sincere concerns about sin, why doesn't that merchant vet each and every customer? That merchant could imperil his soul by selling to other sinners without knowledge! His only concern is disrespecting the gay couple.

 

[Katzndogz]

No, baking a cake or arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt. The same sex marriage is sinful and corrupt. Enabling it and participating in it should be voluntary.
Or should we force people who are against capital punishment for religious reasons to prepare the execution room?

Baking and floral arraigning are not holy rites or sacramental rituals. They are, in fact, the stock and trade of merchants who happen to be bakers and florists.

Supplying drugs is the stock and trade of pharmacists. Some are refusing to supply drugs used to administer the death penalty. Are they wrong or is it okay for them not to participate in what they think of as murder?

 

[Iceweasel]

First, no harm befalls a merchant when servicing same sex weddings and affairs.

Wrong. The foundation is flawed so the rest is meaningless.

 

[Ernie S.]

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

 

[Nosmo King]

No, baking a cake or arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt. The same sex marriage is sinful and corrupt. Enabling it and participating in it should be voluntary.
Or should we force people who are against capital punishment for religious reasons to prepare the execution room?

Baking and floral arraigning are not holy rites or sacramental rituals. They are, in fact, the stock and trade of merchants who happen to be bakers and florists.

Yes they are and compromising your religious beliefs should be voluntary. I think civil unions are fine but homosexual marriages are an abomination. I refuse to participate in an abomination. Your mileage may vary.

No one is asking these wedding vendors to participate in anything. Bakers do not participate in the wedding. They bake, decorate and deliver a cake. Period.

Ya know who DOES participate? The wedding party, perhaps a clergyman or a municipal official or a captain on the high seas. The invited guests participate. But the vendors are plying their trade, not officiating, participating or approving the wedding.

 

[Nosmo King]

First, no harm befalls a merchant when servicing same sex weddings and affairs.

Wrong. The foundation is flawed so the rest is meaningless.

Demonstrate the harm Show prescient.

 

[Katzndogz]

The baker is not judging the customer unworthy. The baker is not committing a sin himself. A baker might bake a wedding cake for a teacher accused of molesting students and still refuse to deliver a cake to an underage orgy.

You see this as an issue of the merchant judging the customer where he is really judging himself and refusing to commit what that merchant considers a sin.

When the government redefines religion in its own image and decides what beliefs people should have then there is no separation of the church from the state. The state has seized control of religion and dictates what others should believe and what they should do in accordance with that belief.

But the merchants are making that determination with homosexual couples only. Had the merchant sincere concerns about sin, why doesn't that merchant vet each and every customer? That merchant could imperil his soul by selling to other sinners without knowledge! His only concern is disrespecting the gay couple.

The merchant is deciding not to commit a sin himself. That is knowingly and with deliberation commit a sin. For monetary gain.

Should people be required to act against their principles?

 

[Ernie S.]

No, baking a cake or arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt. The same sex marriage is sinful and corrupt. Enabling it and participating in it should be voluntary.
Or should we force people who are against capital punishment for religious reasons to prepare the execution room?

Baking and floral arraigning are not holy rites or sacramental rituals. They are, in fact, the stock and trade of merchants who happen to be bakers and florists.

Yes they are and compromising your religious beliefs should be voluntary. I think civil unions are fine but homosexual marriages are an abomination. I refuse to participate in an abomination. Your mileage may vary.

No one is asking these wedding vendors to participate in anything. Bakers do not participate in the wedding. They bake, decorate and deliver a cake. Period.

Ya know who DOES participate? The wedding party, perhaps a clergyman or a municipal official or a captain on the high seas. The invited guests participate. But the vendors are plying their trade, not officiating, participating or approving the wedding.

If I believe that providing a cake or flowers is participating, who are you to say it is not?

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

The free exercise of my religion prohibits my participation.

Yours may not. By all means, bake a cake. I have no problem with how you practice your faith.

 

[Nosmo King]

The baker is not judging the customer unworthy. The baker is not committing a sin himself. A baker might bake a wedding cake for a teacher accused of molesting students and still refuse to deliver a cake to an underage orgy.

You see this as an issue of the merchant judging the customer where he is really judging himself and refusing to commit what that merchant considers a sin.

When the government redefines religion in its own image and decides what beliefs people should have then there is no separation of the church from the state. The state has seized control of religion and dictates what others should believe and what they should do in accordance with that belief.

But the merchants are making that determination with homosexual couples only. Had the merchant sincere concerns about sin, why doesn't that merchant vet each and every customer? That merchant could imperil his soul by selling to other sinners without knowledge! His only concern is disrespecting the gay couple.

The merchant is deciding not to commit a sin himself. That is knowingly and with deliberation commit a sin. For monetary gain.

Should people be required to act against their principles?

When those "principles" exclude other Americans from public businesses, then hell yes!

If those so-called "principles" were part and parcel, basic tenets of Christianity, you might have a point. But such so-called "principles" both fly in the face of the basic tenets and are born solely of dogma.

 

[Katzndogz]

No, baking a cake or arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt. The same sex marriage is sinful and corrupt. Enabling it and participating in it should be voluntary.
Or should we force people who are against capital punishment for religious reasons to prepare the execution room?

Baking and floral arraigning are not holy rites or sacramental rituals. They are, in fact, the stock and trade of merchants who happen to be bakers and florists.

Yes they are and compromising your religious beliefs should be voluntary. I think civil unions are fine but homosexual marriages are an abomination. I refuse to participate in an abomination. Your mileage may vary.

No one is asking these wedding vendors to participate in anything. Bakers do not participate in the wedding. They bake, decorate and deliver a cake. Period.

Ya know who DOES participate? The wedding party, perhaps a clergyman or a municipal official or a captain on the high seas. The invited guests participate. But the vendors are plying their trade, not officiating, participating or approving the wedding.

The merchant by applying his talent and artistry messages approval of the event.

Would you approve of a baker that did only door to door service? Drop off the cake at the door and leave the set up to the couple. Deliver armloads of flowers to the door and leave the arranging to someone else. The photographer sets up a camera on the sidewalk outside the venue. Is that okay. Since these vendors don't actually participate it should be.

 

[MaryL]

First, no harm befalls a merchant when servicing same sex weddings and affairs. The immortal souls of merchants is not at risk by doing business. Providing the exact same services to both heterosexual and homosexual weddings does not endanger anyone's soul.

The claim that is does stems not from the basic tenets of the faith, but from dogma. The basic tenets of Christianity maintain love for your neighbor, not judging lest ye be judged and those without sin should cast the first stone. But the notion that baking a cake of arranging flowers for a same sex wedding is sinful and corrupt is a notion born from peculiar dogma. I'm a Christian and if the fear of servicing homosexual customers in the same manner every other customer is not part of the liturgical teachings in my church. If serving homosexuals was so grave a danger businesses would fear for the standing of their souls, that would be universal among Christians.

What these Religious Restoration Acts do is provide legal cover for repressive bigotry. And that also flies in the face of the basic American tenets of faith: all men are created equal and they are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Whether or not it harms anyone is besides the point, it won't harm gays if they have to shop around for a non essential services, either. Besides, there are plenty of "adult" oriented novelty bakeries around that would be happy to make a profit here, so what's the big deal?