Hmmm...I thought churches didn't have to worry about performing gay marriages...what about this...

By the way for all of you people aghast about these ministers being told that business's have to serve homosexuals- that is I believe a state law being enforced.

I look forward to hearing why State laws banning marriage should be respected- but not State laws banning discrimination in service.

And recourse is available on a local level- change State law so that people can discriminate against whoever they want to.

There are no state laws "banning marriage" they were restricting the legal marriage contract to opposite sex couples.

And oppressing a religion is a violation of the 1st amendment, clear and dry, not one of those made up rights you lefties seem to poof out of thin air.
 
Sounds like another rightwing load of bullshit

Someone let me know what the REAL story is

Too late for denial. Our usual same sex fascists already have responded to a thread on this, and go with the usual "submit or be punished" line of logic.
Is that the one where it turned out to not be a church but a for profit business?

How does ones tax status affect ones position as a minister? I forgot the part of the 1st amendment that states that....
 
Sounds like another rightwing load of bullshit

Someone let me know what the REAL story is

The real story was covered, at length, in previous threads on this stupidity.

They are NOT "ministers", they're business men, running a for-profit business.

They broke the law. It has nothing at all to do with being "liberal" except that RWs are in favor of breaking equality laws.

The government doesn't get to decide who is a minister or not, that pesky first amendment again.
 
Sounds like another rightwing load of bullshit

Someone let me know what the REAL story is

The real story was covered, at length, in previous threads on this stupidity.

They are NOT "ministers", they're business men, running a for-profit business.

They broke the law. It has nothing at all to do with being "liberal" except that RWs are in favor of breaking equality laws.


If they did not charge for their services, then there is a violation of the government intruding on their religion.

Since they do charge, then they are subject to different laws.

The last thing is, that I would not go to a minister and ask them to preform a wedding for me, if his beliefs were not in align with mine. The homosexuals are being petty.
 
It is a business that advertising performing a secular wedding ceremony. They are not a tax exempt church, get over it.
Where do they advertise secular weddings? I'm skeptical, why not go to a JP?

I have nothing to get over. I didn't say it was a church and it isn't my business. The point was that it isn't yours either, most folks find a company that provides the service they want but the fags are too deranged apparently. You, on the other hand, are a slave to your orientation. You live in the gay threads, it's your life. Maybe you need to get over it?

You don't have to be a member of any church nor profess a religion to get married there. Anyone (except the "fags") can get a license and make an appointment. Secular, religious, whatever (except the "fags"). That violates the business laws of the locality apparently.

Know what they have the option of doing? Stop being a for profit business and declare themselves a tax exempt church. Oh, but then they couldn't worship the all mighty dollar that seems to be more important than their actual faith.


You're so blinded by your tyrannical, leftist, ideology you can even see that stuff like this will hurt your cause:eusa_eh:...Go somewhere else
That's what they said in Nashville about the Woolworths Lunch Counter.

Blacs who fought for their civil rights would roll over in their graves if they knew the way you faggots have perverted their cause.

The same people who thought Blacks shouldn't have equal rights with Whites, also oppose equal rights for 'faggots'.

Matter of fact- the same people who use the word 'faggot' are pretty much the same people who use the word 'N****r'- and for the same reason.
 
City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings Fox News

I'm no true believer but this is complete bullshit & goes against our founding principles.


you're no true believer ?

sure you are, you believe everything Fox feeds you.
Right, because Fox News totally made up the lawsuit that is being filed....

stfu Fox fan ... don't talk with your mouth full ... grunt and nod your head.
 
Where do they advertise secular weddings? I'm skeptical, why not go to a JP?

I have nothing to get over. I didn't say it was a church and it isn't my business. The point was that it isn't yours either, most folks find a company that provides the service they want but the fags are too deranged apparently. You, on the other hand, are a slave to your orientation. You live in the gay threads, it's your life. Maybe you need to get over it?

You don't have to be a member of any church nor profess a religion to get married there. Anyone (except the "fags") can get a license and make an appointment. Secular, religious, whatever (except the "fags"). That violates the business laws of the locality apparently.

Know what they have the option of doing? Stop being a for profit business and declare themselves a tax exempt church. Oh, but then they couldn't worship the all mighty dollar that seems to be more important than their actual faith.


You're so blinded by your tyrannical, leftist, ideology you can even see that stuff like this will hurt your cause:eusa_eh:...Go somewhere else
That's what they said in Nashville about the Woolworths Lunch Counter.

Blacs who fought for their civil rights would roll over in their graves if they knew the way you faggots have perverted their cause.

The same people who thought Blacks shouldn't have equal rights with Whites, also oppose equal rights for 'faggots'.

Matter of fact- the same people who use the word 'faggot' are pretty much the same people who use the word 'N****r'- and for the same reason.

Oh, I believe in equal rights. I believe a gay shop owner should have the right to refuse service to straight people
 
City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings Fox News

I'm no true believer but this is complete bullshit & goes against our founding principles.
Nero reborn! I wonder when the Libs will start crucifying Christians upside down and/or tossing them to the lions. Thought we had "evolved" past such barbaric persecution.

Bring back the Colosseum !!!
1343842185874_4940191.png
 
Actually, no. The Hitching Post explicitly states that they can and will perform non-religious ceremonies in purely secular services.
They're not a church, they're officially open for everyone regardless of religion.

They are still ordained ministers and cannot be compelled to act against their morals.

So if they claim as 'ordained ministers' that their moral beliefs state that they cannot pay income taxes- they can't be compelled to pay income taxes?

Taxes and forcing some to perform a wedding by government fiat are two different things.

The claim was made:

They are still ordained ministers and cannot be compelled to act against their morals.

My question stands- can they be compelled to pay income taxes if they claim it would be against their morals?

The issue is exactly the same. Can anyone who claims to be a religious professional be forced by government to do anything that he or she claims is against his or her religious teachings?

For instance- can the government force a Seventh Day Adventist minister to allow blood transfusions to their children?

Tax paying is a required part of society, the burden placed on not being able to religiously pay taxes has to be extremely high, and considering most religions are 100% OK with it, this is a strawman and a non-issue.

The children/blood transfusion issue is more about the power of the government to be a guardian over parents of a minor, again, not relevant.

What we have here is government force on ordained ministers, in a non essential, easy to get elsewhere service.

As an edit, its Jehovah's Witnesses that refuse blood transfusions, not Seventh Day Adventists.

My apologies to Seventh Day Adventists.

The issue is not whether or not 'most' religions are comfortable with paying taxes- I go back to the same initial claim:

They are still ordained ministers and cannot be compelled to act against their morals.

What I think you are saying is that yes- ordained ministers can be compelled to act against what they claim to be their morals- but it depends on what the government demands that they do.

They have two options:
a) they can try to change State law or
b) they can go to court to try to change the law- which is of course what gay couples have done to overturn state laws against same gender marriage.

I am fine if they want to pursue either course. But at the moment- as business people- they have broken state law.
 
Sounds like another rightwing load of bullshit

Someone let me know what the REAL story is

Too late for denial. Our usual same sex fascists already have responded to a thread on this, and go with the usual "submit or be punished" line of logic.
Is that the one where it turned out to not be a church but a for profit business?

How does ones tax status affect ones position as a minister? I forgot the part of the 1st amendment that states that....

Oh....I forgot

Corporations are now people
 
Sounds like another rightwing load of bullshit

Someone let me know what the REAL story is

The real story was covered, at length, in previous threads on this stupidity.

They are NOT "ministers", they're business men, running a for-profit business.

They broke the law. It has nothing at all to do with being "liberal" except that RWs are in favor of breaking equality laws.

The government doesn't get to decide who is a minister or not, that pesky first amendment again.


and the religious parasites get a tax free ride
 

Forum List

Back
Top