Is Providing A Product For Gays Condoning Gays?

[AntiParty]

Is Providing A Product For Gays Condoning Gays? Because it seems like if you deny those people the sale just because they are gay you are being JUDGMENTAL. Do not judge or be judged.

Which is the bigger sin?

 

[TemplarKormac]

 

[Missourian]

It's not the providing of a product...it is being personally involved.

If a photographer believes gay marriage is a sin, the law should not require them to ATTEND a gay marriage and be a participant. Same for a caterer, or a florist. Basically, it is a requirement to be a party to sinful behavior...and that is the definition of restricting freedom of religion.

That is far different from simply "providing a product". If a car dealership refused to sell a gay citizen a car because they were gay, that would be a whole nother story.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's a fail thread from the get go. No one says providing a product to gays is condoning homosexuality. No one really has an issue with someone being homosexual.
The issue is enabling a gay wedding and people have issues with that.

 

[tyroneweaver]

gays just like to stick their thumb in peoples eyes.
what can be more deranged than packing fudge

 

[OKTexas]

Is providing arms to a country showing support for that country? Answer this and you'll have your answer.

 

[FJO]

Is Providing A Product For Gays Condoning Gays? Because it seems like if you deny those people the sale just because they are gay you are being JUDGMENTAL. Do not judge or be judged.

Which is the bigger sin?

The biggest sin is being stupid and a shit disturbing idiot.
Any normal person would go to an other store if he/she can't find what they want in the store they started with.
A shit disturbing idiot is too stupid to do so, instead relies on the government to correct an imaginary wrong, just as they rely on government for their food stamps.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Is Providing A Product For Gays Condoning Gays? Because it seems like if you deny those people the sale just because they are gay you are being JUDGMENTAL. Do not judge or be judged.

Which is the bigger sin?

Is making cheap firearms no police, security, or self-defense user would use, but criminals will because they're cheap and disposable condoning crime?

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's not the providing of a product...it is being personally involved.

If a photographer believes gay marriage is a sin, the law should not require them to ATTEND a gay marriage and be a participant. Same for a caterer, or a florist. Basically, it is a requirement to be a party to sinful behavior...and that is the definition of restricting freedom of religion.

That is far different from simply "providing a product". If a car dealership refused to sell a gay citizen a car because they were gay, that would be a whole nother story.

Catering a wedding is no more 'being a participant' than selling hotdogs at a ballgame is being a participant in the game.

By your 'logic' anyone who had a home related business - cleaning carpets, pest control, pool cleaning, landscaping, plumbing, electrician, housekeeping, and on and on,

could refuse to do business with a gay married couple because they were 'participating' in their lifestyle.

 

[Iceweasel]

Government tyranny is a far worse threat than someone's feelings getting hurt. I make judgements every day, it isn't really hard to do. It's like going to the gym if you've never worked out, you struggle with the 5lb dumbbells and before you know it, it gets easier and you take on larger challenges.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Is Providing A Product For Gays Condoning Gays? Because it seems like if you deny those people the sale just because they are gay you are being JUDGMENTAL. Do not judge or be judged.

Which is the bigger sin?

Why would someone be in favor of government forcing another person to go against their religious beliefs? It seems govt is being judgmental.

 

[Iceweasel]

Catering a wedding is no more 'being a participant' than selling hotdogs at a ballgame is being a participant in the game.

You are a world class moron. If a hot dog vendor decides he doesn't want to attend the gay league games he shouldn't be forced to by narcissistic dickheads like you.

 

[Freewill]

LOL

 

[LordBrownTrout]

It's not the providing of a product...it is being personally involved.

If a photographer believes gay marriage is a sin, the law should not require them to ATTEND a gay marriage and be a participant. Same for a caterer, or a florist. Basically, it is a requirement to be a party to sinful behavior...and that is the definition of restricting freedom of religion.

That is far different from simply "providing a product". If a car dealership refused to sell a gay citizen a car because they were gay, that would be a whole nother story.

Catering a wedding is no more 'being a participant' than selling hotdogs at a ballgame is being a participant in the game.

By your 'logic' anyone who had a home related business - cleaning carpets, pest control, pool cleaning, landscaping, plumbing, electrician, housekeeping, and on and on,

could refuse to do business with a gay married couple because they were 'participating' in their lifestyle.

So, if there were 10 hot dog stands in new york, you would be cool with govt forcing one of them to attend a gay wedding to serve hot dogs?

 

[Katzndogz]

Gays have not been denied a product.

 

[Freewill]

This is all trumped up BS.

I would guess that 99 percent of the gays who had a baker refuse to bake a cake for their wedding would be OK with that and move on.

And we know that the pizza incident was predicated on lies and no one ever was discriminated against.

Now we have reports of everyone being forced to do whatever is deemed PC. How in the hell did the left wing get so much power?

 

[Camp]

It's not the providing of a product...it is being personally involved.

If a photographer believes gay marriage is a sin, the law should not require them to ATTEND a gay marriage and be a participant. Same for a caterer, or a florist. Basically, it is a requirement to be a party to sinful behavior...and that is the definition of restricting freedom of religion.

That is far different from simply "providing a product". If a car dealership refused to sell a gay citizen a car because they were gay, that would be a whole nother story.

Catering a wedding is no more 'being a participant' than selling hotdogs at a ballgame is being a participant in the game.

By your 'logic' anyone who had a home related business - cleaning carpets, pest control, pool cleaning, landscaping, plumbing, electrician, housekeeping, and on and on,

could refuse to do business with a gay married couple because they were 'participating' in their lifestyle.

So, if there were 10 hot dog stands in new york, you would be cool with govt forcing one of them to attend a gay wedding to serve hot dogs?

Why do you guys always have to come up with ridiculous examples to attempt to make the silly points you try to make? No one in NYC will have a problem finding a hot dog vendor to service a gay wedding and the city would not and could not force anyone to service such a wedding.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Is Providing A Product For Gays Condoning Gays? Because it seems like if you deny those people the sale just because they are gay you are being JUDGMENTAL. Do not judge or be judged.

Which is the bigger sin?

Why would someone be in favor of government forcing another person to go against their religious beliefs? It seems govt is being judgmental.

I'm sure people said the same thing back when government gave the finger to some's religious beliefs re: segregation, interracial marriage, and slavery.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's not the providing of a product...it is being personally involved.

If a photographer believes gay marriage is a sin, the law should not require them to ATTEND a gay marriage and be a participant. Same for a caterer, or a florist. Basically, it is a requirement to be a party to sinful behavior...and that is the definition of restricting freedom of religion.

That is far different from simply "providing a product". If a car dealership refused to sell a gay citizen a car because they were gay, that would be a whole nother story.

Catering a wedding is no more 'being a participant' than selling hotdogs at a ballgame is being a participant in the game.

By your 'logic' anyone who had a home related business - cleaning carpets, pest control, pool cleaning, landscaping, plumbing, electrician, housekeeping, and on and on,

could refuse to do business with a gay married couple because they were 'participating' in their lifestyle.

So, if there were 10 hot dog stands in new york, you would be cool with govt forcing one of them to attend a gay wedding to serve hot dogs?

If a hotdog vendor offers a wedding catering service, then yes, he should not be able to discriminate against gay weddings.

If gay weddings bother him, then he needs to get out of the wedding catering business.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

It's not the providing of a product...it is being personally involved.

If a photographer believes gay marriage is a sin, the law should not require them to ATTEND a gay marriage and be a participant. Same for a caterer, or a florist. Basically, it is a requirement to be a party to sinful behavior...and that is the definition of restricting freedom of religion.

That is far different from simply "providing a product". If a car dealership refused to sell a gay citizen a car because they were gay, that would be a whole nother story.

Catering a wedding is no more 'being a participant' than selling hotdogs at a ballgame is being a participant in the game.

By your 'logic' anyone who had a home related business - cleaning carpets, pest control, pool cleaning, landscaping, plumbing, electrician, housekeeping, and on and on,

could refuse to do business with a gay married couple because they were 'participating' in their lifestyle.

So, if there were 10 hot dog stands in new york, you would be cool with govt forcing one of them to attend a gay wedding to serve hot dogs?

Why do you guys always have to come up with ridiculous examples to attempt to make the silly points you try to make? No one in NYC will have a problem finding a hot dog vendor to service a gay wedding and the city would not and could not force anyone to service such a wedding.

They wouldn't? Colorado said a baker must be forced to sell cakes at a gay wedding.