If Christians are allowed to discriminate against gays ...

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I'll tell you who has no control. Guys like Donald Trump who can't stop committing adultery. Yet I don't hear any of these alleged biblically compliant bigots complaining about it. Ever.

Oh, but, see. It was hetero adultery, so it's forgivable. Homo sex? Jesus is not powerful enough to overcome such an egregious abomination.


Jesus is weak.


That's why I am not Christian. Complete and total hypocrisy.

I am a Christian. I believe the issue of gay marriage is one between the people and the government, not the church. This is not a religious issue. It is all about government cash and prizes.

If government was not involved in marriage, people would go to the church of their choice, get married in the eyes of God, and no one else would give a flying fuck.

But as soon as a hated group asks for the same tax breaks and other civil rights the rest of society receives, the alleged biblicaly compliant Christians lose their shit.

That's why I joke about Bible 2.0:

And Jesus said, "You can marry as many times as you wish and commit adultery as often as you wish, even with a pornographic actress. But if you bake a cake for a homo you will surely burn in the fires of hell forever."

It absolutely makes no sense and is an excuse for bigotry. It's not a sin to bake a gay couple a fucking cake, is it? Where is that sin identified?

That is the philosophical side.

On the legal justice and jurisprudence side, I cannot get behind using FORCE to make those bigots bake a cake against their will. I cannot do it.

To me, FORCING a person to provide services to another against that person's will is wrong by all accounts. It is the essence of malum in se.

The baker becomes a slave to the bakee.

 

[Pop23]

Someday in the future, the descendants of these bigots are going to trying to convince us their ancestors of the early 21st century who opposed civil rights for gays were left wing Republicans.

Or laugh their asses off that no one really understood that it was a mental disability.

We are speculating after all.

 

[g5000]

I'll tell you who has no control. Guys like Donald Trump who can't stop committing adultery. Yet I don't hear any of these alleged biblically compliant bigots complaining about it. Ever.

Oh, but, see. It was hetero adultery, so it's forgivable. Homo sex? Jesus is not powerful enough to overcome such an egregious abomination.


Jesus is weak.


That's why I am not Christian. Complete and total hypocrisy.

I am a Christian. I believe the issue of gay marriage is one between the people and the government, not the church. This is not a religious issue. It is all about government cash and prizes.

If government was not involved in marriage, people would go to the church of their choice, get married in the eyes of God, and no one else would give a flying fuck.

But as soon as a hated group asks for the same tax breaks and other civil rights the rest of society receives, the alleged biblicaly compliant Christians lose their shit.

That's why I joke about Bible 2.0:

And Jesus said, "You can marry as many times as you wish and commit adultery as often as you wish, even with a pornographic actress. But if you bake a cake for a homo you will surely burn in the fires of hell forever."

It absolutely makes no sense and is an excuse for bigotry. It's not a sin to bake a gay couple a fucking cake, is it? Where is that sin identified?

That is the philosophical side.

On the legal justice and jurisprudence side, I cannot get behind using FORCE to make those bigots bake a cake against their will. I cannot do it.

To me, FORCING a person to provide services to another against that person's will is wrong by all accounts. It is the essence of malum in se.

The baker becomes a slave to the bakee.

I would prefer the government not tell a business who they may or may not serve. However, as I explained above, that pooch was long ago screwed thanks to the racists of the Deep South.

At the same time, I don't buy for one second the bakers are not serving gays because of the bible.

Not for one second. They are bigots using the bible as a shield, and there is a special place in hell for people like that.

 

[Pop23]

I'll tell you who has no control. Guys like Donald Trump who can't stop committing adultery. Yet I don't hear any of these alleged biblically compliant bigots complaining about it. Ever.

Oh, but, see. It was hetero adultery, so it's forgivable. Homo sex? Jesus is not powerful enough to overcome such an egregious abomination.


Jesus is weak.


That's why I am not Christian. Complete and total hypocrisy.

I am a Christian. I believe the issue of gay marriage is one between the people and the government, not the church. This is not a religious issue. It is all about government cash and prizes.

If government was not involved in marriage, people would go to the church of their choice, get married in the eyes of God, and no one else would give a flying fuck.

But as soon as a hated group asks for the same tax breaks and other civil rights the rest of society receives, the alleged biblicaly compliant Christians lose their shit.

That's why I joke about Bible 2.0:

And Jesus said, "You can marry as many times as you wish and commit adultery as often as you wish, even with a pornographic actress. But if you bake a cake for a homo you will surely burn in the fires of hell forever."

It absolutely makes no sense and is an excuse for bigotry. It's not a sin to bake a gay couple a fucking cake, is it? Where is that sin identified?

That is the philosophical side.

On the legal justice and jurisprudence side, I cannot get behind using FORCE to make those bigots bake a cake against their will. I cannot do it.

To me, FORCING a person to provide services to another against that person's will is wrong by all accounts. It is the essence of malum in se.

The baker becomes a slave to the bakee.

I would prefer the government not tell a business who they may or may not serve. However, as I explained above, that pooch was long ago screwed thanks to the racists of the Deep South.

At the same time, I don't buy for one second the bakers are not serving gays because of the bible.

Not for one second.

And things never change? How lame is that, then to fight for equal marriage rights, cuz, as we know, things never change.

Too funny

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Screw the pooch. Those are the exact words I used last week about the racists and Jim Crow laws.

The whole reason we have federal government interference in these matters is precisely because of the intransigence of the racists during the fight for civil rights for blacks. The racists used the force of government to keep blacks oppressed, and thus screwed the pooch with their precedent. They forced the issue, and the federal government had no choice but to step in.

And here we are.

That is EXACTLY what they did. And force was justified in removing unjust force. No question.

There's no need to repeat the same mistake.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I'll tell you who has no control. Guys like Donald Trump who can't stop committing adultery. Yet I don't hear any of these alleged biblically compliant bigots complaining about it. Ever.

Oh, but, see. It was hetero adultery, so it's forgivable. Homo sex? Jesus is not powerful enough to overcome such an egregious abomination.


Jesus is weak.


That's why I am not Christian. Complete and total hypocrisy.

I am a Christian. I believe the issue of gay marriage is one between the people and the government, not the church. This is not a religious issue. It is all about government cash and prizes.

If government was not involved in marriage, people would go to the church of their choice, get married in the eyes of God, and no one else would give a flying fuck.

But as soon as a hated group asks for the same tax breaks and other civil rights the rest of society receives, the alleged biblicaly compliant Christians lose their shit.

That's why I joke about Bible 2.0:

And Jesus said, "You can marry as many times as you wish and commit adultery as often as you wish, even with a pornographic actress. But if you bake a cake for a homo you will surely burn in the fires of hell forever."

It absolutely makes no sense and is an excuse for bigotry. It's not a sin to bake a gay couple a fucking cake, is it? Where is that sin identified?

That is the philosophical side.

On the legal justice and jurisprudence side, I cannot get behind using FORCE to make those bigots bake a cake against their will. I cannot do it.

To me, FORCING a person to provide services to another against that person's will is wrong by all accounts. It is the essence of malum in se.

The baker becomes a slave to the bakee.

I would prefer the government not tell a business who they may or may not serve. However, as I explained above, that pooch was long ago screwed thanks to the racists of the Deep South.

At the same time, I don't buy for one second the bakers are not serving gays because of the bible.

Not for one second. They are bigots using the bible as a shield, and there is a special place in hell for people like that.

Again, just because improper use of government force was used in the past does not justify its continued or future use.

Let's not repeat the same mistake.

 

[g5000]

I'll tell you who has no control. Guys like Donald Trump who can't stop committing adultery. Yet I don't hear any of these alleged biblically compliant bigots complaining about it. Ever.

Oh, but, see. It was hetero adultery, so it's forgivable. Homo sex? Jesus is not powerful enough to overcome such an egregious abomination.


Jesus is weak.


That's why I am not Christian. Complete and total hypocrisy.

I am a Christian. I believe the issue of gay marriage is one between the people and the government, not the church. This is not a religious issue. It is all about government cash and prizes.

If government was not involved in marriage, people would go to the church of their choice, get married in the eyes of God, and no one else would give a flying fuck.

But as soon as a hated group asks for the same tax breaks and other civil rights the rest of society receives, the alleged biblicaly compliant Christians lose their shit.

That's why I joke about Bible 2.0:

And Jesus said, "You can marry as many times as you wish and commit adultery as often as you wish, even with a pornographic actress. But if you bake a cake for a homo you will surely burn in the fires of hell forever."

It absolutely makes no sense and is an excuse for bigotry. It's not a sin to bake a gay couple a fucking cake, is it? Where is that sin identified?

That is the philosophical side.

On the legal justice and jurisprudence side, I cannot get behind using FORCE to make those bigots bake a cake against their will. I cannot do it.

To me, FORCING a person to provide services to another against that person's will is wrong by all accounts. It is the essence of malum in se.

The baker becomes a slave to the bakee.

I would prefer the government not tell a business who they may or may not serve. However, as I explained above, that pooch was long ago screwed thanks to the racists of the Deep South.

At the same time, I don't buy for one second the bakers are not serving gays because of the bible.

Not for one second. They are bigots using the bible as a shield, and there is a special place in hell for people like that.

Again, just because improper use of government force was used in the past does not justify its continued or future use.

Let's not repeat the same mistake.

There are local laws being used to protect discrimination against gays even now.

So here we are.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

There are local laws being used to protect bigotry against gays even now.

So here we are.

And I will fight that too.

But, how does that work? Local laws forbid gays from going into a christian bakery? How are they being used?

 

[g5000]

There are local laws being used to protect bigotry against gays even now.

So here we are.

And I will fight that too.

But, how does that work? Local laws forbid gays from going into a christian bakery? How are they being used?

Local laws forbade gays from marrying and receiving government cash and prizes. It took the power of the federal government to override them.

In some states, local laws have been passed to protect businesses who fire someone for being gay.

Here’s Everywhere In The U.S. You Can Still Get Fired For Being Gay Or Trans

 

[g5000]

Trump Administration Says Bias Rules Don't Cover Gay Workers

The U.S. law that has protected workers from gender and racial bias for more than half a century should not be extended to cover gay and lesbian employees because that isn’t what Congress envisioned when it passed the bill, Trump administration lawyers told a federal appeals court.

 

[g5000]

The bigoted bakers are pleading First Amendment rights. It's horseshit. Their bigotry has nothing to do with religion and the free exercise thereof. This is easily proven by their willingness to bake cakes for adulterers.

Have you ever heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for someone remarrying?

Me, either.

And yet Jesus quite plainly said that is adultery. He never said a word about gays.

So the bigoted bakers' argument they are being biblicaly compliant is utter horseshit.

 

[dblack]

The bigoted bakers are pleading First Amendment rights. It's horseshit. Their bigotry has nothing to do with religion and the free exercise thereof. This is easily proven by their willingness to bake cakes for adulterers.

Have you ever heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for someone remarrying?

Me, either.

And yet Jesus quite plainly said that is adultery. He never said a word about gays.

So the bigoted bakers' argument they are being biblicaly compliant is utter horseshit.

It's irrelevant. The point here is that government doesn't have any business second guessing our personal preferences, no matter how irrational.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If anything, it is the "tolerance" crowd that is trying to stigmatize religion and are actually the oppressors, because they are trying to force everyone else to comply with their own beliefs.

Oh please. Give me a break. I do not give a rats hind parts about what you believe, and most people are smart enough to know that they cannot control anyone else's beliefs. The issue is how you behave towards, and treat others

I don't blame you for believing, or not believing what others do, what people are simply asking is, don't try to force your lifestyle on others who don't agree with it, and don't get bent out of shape when someone refuses to act the way they think you should act.

If a baker doesn't want to serve you due to religious convictions, then move along to the next baker, and stop trying to turn every case into discrimination when it's not. I'm not saying discrimination doesn't exist, but it's not around every corner when something doesn't go the way you want it to. I mean, if we're going to levy that charge any time our feathers get ruffled, well shoot, I can make a whole lot of people do things they don't want to do, based on discrimination.

And In this post, when I say "you", I don't mean you, I mean you as in general people.

That isn’t the way it works

If you can’t serve all members of the public find another line of work.

No one gives a damn about your religion

Glad to see that you think people are putting in their life savings and long hours of work NOT to open their own business and create something of their own, but to become YOUR slave and be obligated to create what YOU demand they must.

Tell me, what's it like to think the entire universe exists to serve you?

 

[g5000]

The bigoted bakers are pleading First Amendment rights. It's horseshit. Their bigotry has nothing to do with religion and the free exercise thereof. This is easily proven by their willingness to bake cakes for adulterers.

Have you ever heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for someone remarrying?

Me, either.

And yet Jesus quite plainly said that is adultery. He never said a word about gays.

So the bigoted bakers' argument they are being biblicaly compliant is utter horseshit.

It's irrelevant. The point here is that government doesn't have any business second guessing our personal preferences, not matter how irrational.

Actually, irrationality was the exact reason the Supreme Court overruled laws banning mixed marriages in Loving v. Virginia.

 

[Pop23]

The bigoted bakers are pleading First Amendment rights. It's horseshit. Their bigotry has nothing to do with religion and the free exercise thereof. This is easily proven by their willingness to bake cakes for adulterers.

Have you ever heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for someone remarrying?

Me, either.

And yet Jesus quite plainly said that is adultery. He never said a word about gays.

So the bigoted bakers' argument they are being biblicaly compliant is utter horseshit.

Except Marriage doesn't have sex as a material reason to marry, so there's that, plus this same Baker would not bake a cake for a Heterosexual same sex couple, same as a Homosexual Couple because the teaching is that Marriage is between a Man and a Woman.

Is your head about to pop yet?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The correct solution was to disarm BOTH sides and declare marriage a contractual arrangement that does not, and should not require any type of state permission (license).

Leaving the door open to child marriages, coerced marriages , and incest.

Notice how PP is trying to deny this “right” to others by using fear and misstatements?

Remind you of anything else?

What right am I trying to deny to who, Bubba? You wouldn't be suggesting that people have the right to marry children, now would you?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

In some states, local laws have been passed to protect businesses who fire someone for being gay.

In Texas, you can fire anyone for any reason, or no reason at all (subject only to Fed. EEO laws).

What is wrong with that? No one should have a right to a particular job with a particular employer. No employer should have a duty to employ any particular person. No employer has the right to the services of any particular person.

And, why would anyone want to work for an asshole bigot? Why would anyone want to do business with an asshole bigot who fires people solely because they are gay. For many ethical reasons, but also practical reasons.

So, I guess the real question is, WHY DO THEY NEED to pass laws protecting idiotic, bigoted employers who fire gays?

Looks like they already "screwed the pooch" no?

 

[dblack]

The bigoted bakers are pleading First Amendment rights. It's horseshit. Their bigotry has nothing to do with religion and the free exercise thereof. This is easily proven by their willingness to bake cakes for adulterers.

Have you ever heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for someone remarrying?

Me, either.

And yet Jesus quite plainly said that is adultery. He never said a word about gays.

So the bigoted bakers' argument they are being biblicaly compliant is utter horseshit.

It's irrelevant. The point here is that government doesn't have any business second guessing our personal preferences, not matter how irrational.

Actually, irrationality was the exact reason the Supreme Court overruled laws banning mixed marriages in Loving v. Virginia.

Yeah... government is required to provide maintain equal protection, if not rationality. We're talking about individuals and businesses.

 

[jc456]

I'll tell you who has no control. Guys like Donald Trump who can't stop committing adultery. Yet I don't hear any of these alleged biblically compliant bigots complaining about it. Ever.

Oh, but, see. It was hetero adultery, so it's forgivable. Homo sex? Jesus is not powerful enough to overcome such an egregious abomination.


Jesus is weak.


That's why I am not Christian. Complete and total hypocrisy.

I am a Christian. I believe the issue of gay marriage is one between the people and the government, not the church. This is not a religious issue. It is all about government cash and prizes.

If government was not involved in marriage, people would go to the church of their choice, get married in the eyes of God, and no one else would give a flying fuck.

But as soon as a hated group asks for the same tax breaks and other civil rights the rest of society receives, the alleged biblicaly compliant Christians lose their shit.

That's why I joke about Bible 2.0:

And Jesus said, "You can marry as many times as you wish and commit adultery as often as you wish, even with a pornographic actress. But if you bake a cake for a homo you will surely burn in the fires of hell forever."

It absolutely makes no sense and is an excuse for bigotry. It's not a sin to bake a gay couple a fucking cake, is it? Where is that sin identified?

That is the philosophical side.

On the legal justice and jurisprudence side, I cannot get behind using FORCE to make those bigots bake a cake against their will. I cannot do it.

To me, FORCING a person to provide services to another against that person's will is wrong by all accounts. It is the essence of malum in se.

The baker becomes a slave to the bakee.

I would prefer the government not tell a business who they may or may not serve. However, as I explained above, that pooch was long ago screwed thanks to the racists of the Deep South.

At the same time, I don't buy for one second the bakers are not serving gays because of the bible.

Not for one second. They are bigots using the bible as a shield, and there is a special place in hell for people like that.

Again, just because improper use of government force was used in the past does not justify its continued or future use.

Let's not repeat the same mistake.

unless that is their schtick! which we all know it is. i.e., you will do as I say or I will do......\

Damn, sounds like my old man from back in the day.

 

[g5000]

At the very least, the Equal Protection Clause demands that racial classifications, especially suspect in criminal statutes, be subjected to the "most rigid scrutiny," Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214, 216 (1944), and, if they are ever to be upheld, they must be shown to be necessary to the accomplishment of some permissible state objective, independent of the racial discrimination which it was the object of the Fourteenth Amendment to eliminate.

Loving v. Virginia


Discrimination against gays much be shown to

The bigoted bakers are pleading First Amendment rights. It's horseshit. Their bigotry has nothing to do with religion and the free exercise thereof. This is easily proven by their willingness to bake cakes for adulterers.

Have you ever heard of a baker refusing to bake a cake for someone remarrying?

Me, either.

And yet Jesus quite plainly said that is adultery. He never said a word about gays.

So the bigoted bakers' argument they are being biblicaly compliant is utter horseshit.

Except Marriage doesn't have sex as a material reason to marry, so there's that, plus this same Baker would not bake a cake for a Heterosexual same sex couple, same as a Homosexual Couple because the teaching is that Marriage is between a Man and a Woman.

Is your head about to pop yet?

I never said sex was a material reason to marry. Your premise is therefore entirely false.

Jesus was quite plain in his definition of adultery and those who divorce and remarry. Anyone who bakes a cake for someone who has divorced is not complying with the Bible.

Is your head about to pop yet?