SCOTUS: states cannot ban same sex marriage

[Steinlight]

No, not in any sense.

If I own a bakery, should I be allowed to not serve a gay wedding?

Not if your reason is because it offends your religion since there is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking cakes unless it is during Passover.

The Bible, in both the new and old testament, prohibits homosexuality. Is this the new revisionist stance you are taking, that prohibition of homosexuality has no biblical basis?

Beyond being an issue of the exercise of freedom of religion, it is an issue of freedom of association, regardless of the reason given for not choosing to associate with a person.

The fact is you don't believe in free association. Its one thing to say you think people should be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings, or serve gay weddings in other capacities other the law, but you don't believe in freedom or the idea of "live and let live". Don't piss down my neck and tell me it is raining.

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

I don't see anything in the Bible against two people of the same sex getting married and I see nothing prohibiting baking cakes other than during Passover.

Furthermore, there are many people committing other sins besides gay sex and I don't see any religious bakers denying them a wedding cake. Selectively citing religious infringement only against gay marriage, which isn't a sin, is nothing more than discrimination hiding behind religion. That's not allowed in Oregon which is why Sweet Cakes lost the lawsuit.

Well, you haven't read the Bible. I know, you aren't a Christian, but before you make such pronouncements, you should actually check out where the Bible condemns homosexuality. Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are a good start. Paul is particularly hardcore against homosexuality, and say they cannot enter heaven. The idea the bible doesn't condemn homosexuality is ridiculous. So as Christians, they aren't to participate in sinful acts like homosexual weddings.

But yes, I am fully aware that freedom of religion and freedom of association do not exist in Oregon. America is not a free country.

 

[Steinlight]

The Bible, in both the new and old testament, prohibits homosexuality. Is this the new revisionist stance you are taking, that prohibition of homosexuality has no biblical basis?

Beyond being an issue of the exercise of freedom of religion, it is an issue of freedom of association, regardless of the reason given for not choosing to associate with a person.

The fact is you don't believe in free association. Its one thing to say you think people should be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings, or serve gay weddings in other capacities other the law, but you don't believe in freedom or the idea of "live and let live". Don't piss down my neck and tell me it is raining.

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

The fact remains that religious dogma is legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

And it's a fact of law that public accommodations measures in no way 'violate' freedom of association or religious liberty.

Last, public accommodations laws are just, proper, and Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

I don't care what some geriatrics in black robes say. Forcing a business to serve anyone for any reason violates free association and forcing someone to act against their religious conscience violates the free exercise of their religion.

A court can say up is down and black is white, but it doesn't make it so.

That's too funny. Who cares what you think of the Supreme Court justices in their black robes? Their opinion matters. Yours? Not so much.

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Not if your reason is because it offends your religion since there is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking cakes unless it is during Passover.

The Bible, in both the new and old testament, prohibits homosexuality. Is this the new revisionist stance you are taking, that prohibition of homosexuality has no biblical basis?

Beyond being an issue of the exercise of freedom of religion, it is an issue of freedom of association, regardless of the reason given for not choosing to associate with a person.

The fact is you don't believe in free association. Its one thing to say you think people should be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings, or serve gay weddings in other capacities other the law, but you don't believe in freedom or the idea of "live and let live". Don't piss down my neck and tell me it is raining.

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

I don't see anything in the Bible against two people of the same sex getting married and I see nothing prohibiting baking cakes other than during Passover.

Furthermore, there are many people committing other sins besides gay sex and I don't see any religious bakers denying them a wedding cake. Selectively citing religious infringement only against gay marriage, which isn't a sin, is nothing more than discrimination hiding behind religion. That's not allowed in Oregon which is why Sweet Cakes lost the lawsuit.

Well, you haven't read the Bible. I know, you aren't a Christian, but before you make such pronouncements, you should actually check out where the Bible condemns homosexuality. Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are a good start. Paul is particularly hardcore against homosexuality, and say they cannot enter heaven. The idea the bible doesn't condemn homosexuality is ridiculous. So as Christians, they aren't to participate in sinful acts like homosexual weddings.

But yes, I am fully aware that freedom of religion and freedom of association do not exist in Oregon. America is not a free country.

Well, aren't you a stupid fucker.

Homosexuality is not condemned at all.

Specific homosexual acts are: exactly twice, in the Tanakh.

Paul never once actually specifically mentions any homosexual acts and Jesus never spoke of it, not even once.

But I would expect no less of an ugly fucking Jew hater like you. Go fuck yourself. You are no Christian. You are a fake. An empty fake.

 

[Steinlight]

The Bible, in both the new and old testament, prohibits homosexuality. Is this the new revisionist stance you are taking, that prohibition of homosexuality has no biblical basis?

Beyond being an issue of the exercise of freedom of religion, it is an issue of freedom of association, regardless of the reason given for not choosing to associate with a person.

The fact is you don't believe in free association. Its one thing to say you think people should be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings, or serve gay weddings in other capacities other the law, but you don't believe in freedom or the idea of "live and let live". Don't piss down my neck and tell me it is raining.

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

I don't see anything in the Bible against two people of the same sex getting married and I see nothing prohibiting baking cakes other than during Passover.

Furthermore, there are many people committing other sins besides gay sex and I don't see any religious bakers denying them a wedding cake. Selectively citing religious infringement only against gay marriage, which isn't a sin, is nothing more than discrimination hiding behind religion. That's not allowed in Oregon which is why Sweet Cakes lost the lawsuit.

Well, you haven't read the Bible. I know, you aren't a Christian, but before you make such pronouncements, you should actually check out where the Bible condemns homosexuality. Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are a good start. Paul is particularly hardcore against homosexuality, and say they cannot enter heaven. The idea the bible doesn't condemn homosexuality is ridiculous. So as Christians, they aren't to participate in sinful acts like homosexual weddings.

But yes, I am fully aware that freedom of religion and freedom of association do not exist in Oregon. America is not a free country.

Well, aren't you a stupid fucker.

Homosexuality is not condemned at all.

Specific homosexual acts are: exactly twice, in the Tanakh.

Paul never once actually specifically mentions any homosexual acts and Jesus never spoke of it, not even once.

But I would expect no less of an ugly fucking Jew hater like you. Go fuck yourself. You are no Christian. You are a fake. An empty fake.

Yes it is.

Read 1 Romans 26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 1 Timothy 1:9-10 .

I know your people don't have the New Testament, but you are going to make claims about the New Testament, the book of God's people, you should actually read it.

Also, calm down shlomo.

 

[Statistikhengst]

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

I don't see anything in the Bible against two people of the same sex getting married and I see nothing prohibiting baking cakes other than during Passover.

Furthermore, there are many people committing other sins besides gay sex and I don't see any religious bakers denying them a wedding cake. Selectively citing religious infringement only against gay marriage, which isn't a sin, is nothing more than discrimination hiding behind religion. That's not allowed in Oregon which is why Sweet Cakes lost the lawsuit.

Well, you haven't read the Bible. I know, you aren't a Christian, but before you make such pronouncements, you should actually check out where the Bible condemns homosexuality. Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are a good start. Paul is particularly hardcore against homosexuality, and say they cannot enter heaven. The idea the bible doesn't condemn homosexuality is ridiculous. So as Christians, they aren't to participate in sinful acts like homosexual weddings.

But yes, I am fully aware that freedom of religion and freedom of association do not exist in Oregon. America is not a free country.

Well, aren't you a stupid fucker.

Homosexuality is not condemned at all.

Specific homosexual acts are: exactly twice, in the Tanakh.

Paul never once actually specifically mentions any homosexual acts and Jesus never spoke of it, not even once.

But I would expect no less of an ugly fucking Jew hater like you. Go fuck yourself. You are no Christian. You are a fake. An empty fake.

Yes it is.

Read 1 Romans 26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 1 Timothy 1:9-10 .

I know your people don't have the New Testament, but you are going to make claims about the New Testament, the book of God's people, you should actually read it.

Also, calm down shlomo.

I bet I have read the NT more times than you, slimeshitter.

 

[Faun]

Not if your reason is because it offends your religion since there is nothing in the Bible prohibiting baking cakes unless it is during Passover.

The Bible, in both the new and old testament, prohibits homosexuality. Is this the new revisionist stance you are taking, that prohibition of homosexuality has no biblical basis?

Beyond being an issue of the exercise of freedom of religion, it is an issue of freedom of association, regardless of the reason given for not choosing to associate with a person.

The fact is you don't believe in free association. Its one thing to say you think people should be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings, or serve gay weddings in other capacities other the law, but you don't believe in freedom or the idea of "live and let live". Don't piss down my neck and tell me it is raining.

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

I don't see anything in the Bible against two people of the same sex getting married and I see nothing prohibiting baking cakes other than during Passover.

Furthermore, there are many people committing other sins besides gay sex and I don't see any religious bakers denying them a wedding cake. Selectively citing religious infringement only against gay marriage, which isn't a sin, is nothing more than discrimination hiding behind religion. That's not allowed in Oregon which is why Sweet Cakes lost the lawsuit.

Well, you haven't read the Bible. I know, you aren't a Christian, but before you make such pronouncements, you should actually check out where the Bible condemns homosexuality. Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are a good start. Paul is particularly hardcore against homosexuality, and say they cannot enter heaven. The idea the bible doesn't condemn homosexuality is ridiculous. So as Christians, they aren't to participate in sinful acts like homosexual weddings.

But yes, I am fully aware that freedom of religion and freedom of association do not exist in Oregon. America is not a free country.

Just how fucking retarded are you? I never said the Bible doesn't condemn gay sex.

 

[Faun]

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

The fact remains that religious dogma is legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

And it's a fact of law that public accommodations measures in no way 'violate' freedom of association or religious liberty.

Last, public accommodations laws are just, proper, and Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

I don't care what some geriatrics in black robes say. Forcing a business to serve anyone for any reason violates free association and forcing someone to act against their religious conscience violates the free exercise of their religion.

A court can say up is down and black is white, but it doesn't make it so.

That's too funny. Who cares what you think of the Supreme Court justices in their black robes? Their opinion matters. Yours? Not so much.

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

 

[Steinlight]

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

I don't see anything in the Bible against two people of the same sex getting married and I see nothing prohibiting baking cakes other than during Passover.

Furthermore, there are many people committing other sins besides gay sex and I don't see any religious bakers denying them a wedding cake. Selectively citing religious infringement only against gay marriage, which isn't a sin, is nothing more than discrimination hiding behind religion. That's not allowed in Oregon which is why Sweet Cakes lost the lawsuit.

Well, you haven't read the Bible. I know, you aren't a Christian, but before you make such pronouncements, you should actually check out where the Bible condemns homosexuality. Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are a good start. Paul is particularly hardcore against homosexuality, and say they cannot enter heaven. The idea the bible doesn't condemn homosexuality is ridiculous. So as Christians, they aren't to participate in sinful acts like homosexual weddings.

But yes, I am fully aware that freedom of religion and freedom of association do not exist in Oregon. America is not a free country.

Well, aren't you a stupid fucker.

Homosexuality is not condemned at all.

Specific homosexual acts are: exactly twice, in the Tanakh.

Paul never once actually specifically mentions any homosexual acts and Jesus never spoke of it, not even once.

But I would expect no less of an ugly fucking Jew hater like you. Go fuck yourself. You are no Christian. You are a fake. An empty fake.

Yes it is.

Read 1 Romans 26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 1 Timothy 1:9-10 .

I know your people don't have the New Testament, but you are going to make claims about the New Testament, the book of God's people, you should actually read it.

Also, calm down shlomo.

I bet I have read the NT more times than you, slimeshitter.

Not very closely, that much is apparent.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

The fact remains that religious dogma is legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

And it's a fact of law that public accommodations measures in no way 'violate' freedom of association or religious liberty.

Last, public accommodations laws are just, proper, and Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

I don't care what some geriatrics in black robes say. Forcing a business to serve anyone for any reason violates free association and forcing someone to act against their religious conscience violates the free exercise of their religion.

A court can say up is down and black is white, but it doesn't make it so.

That's too funny. Who cares what you think of the Supreme Court justices in their black robes? Their opinion matters. Yours? Not so much.

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Correct.

 

[Steinlight]

The Bible, in both the new and old testament, prohibits homosexuality. Is this the new revisionist stance you are taking, that prohibition of homosexuality has no biblical basis?

Beyond being an issue of the exercise of freedom of religion, it is an issue of freedom of association, regardless of the reason given for not choosing to associate with a person.

The fact is you don't believe in free association. Its one thing to say you think people should be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings, or serve gay weddings in other capacities other the law, but you don't believe in freedom or the idea of "live and let live". Don't piss down my neck and tell me it is raining.

A wedding cake is not gay sex and is not prohibited in the Bible.

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

I don't see anything in the Bible against two people of the same sex getting married and I see nothing prohibiting baking cakes other than during Passover.

Furthermore, there are many people committing other sins besides gay sex and I don't see any religious bakers denying them a wedding cake. Selectively citing religious infringement only against gay marriage, which isn't a sin, is nothing more than discrimination hiding behind religion. That's not allowed in Oregon which is why Sweet Cakes lost the lawsuit.

Well, you haven't read the Bible. I know, you aren't a Christian, but before you make such pronouncements, you should actually check out where the Bible condemns homosexuality. Romans, Timothy and Corinthians are a good start. Paul is particularly hardcore against homosexuality, and say they cannot enter heaven. The idea the bible doesn't condemn homosexuality is ridiculous. So as Christians, they aren't to participate in sinful acts like homosexual weddings.

But yes, I am fully aware that freedom of religion and freedom of association do not exist in Oregon. America is not a free country.

Just how fucking retarded are you? I never said the Bible doesn't condemn gay sex.

If you agree homosexuality is condemned in the Bible, you have an odd way of saying it. But that's ok, it is odd when you were suggesting that there is no religious basis for not participating in a homosexual wedding. But if you are over that than I'll let bygones be bygones.

But the fact remains, you don't respect religious liberty, or free association, so I don't respect you. You are a petty statist and a control freak.

 

[Steinlight]

Enabling sin, in this case, participating in a sinful ceremony is prohibited by the Bible. Pretty clear in 1 Timothy 5:22 that Christians are not to enable sin.

But the fact remains, you don't support free exercise of religion or free association. Not only are you violating someone's religious liberties, you are violating their basic right of free association. In a free society, regardless of the reason, as sovereign individuals, we have the right to associate and disassociate with whoever we cant, because we are sovereign and own ourselves.

The fact remains that religious dogma is legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

And it's a fact of law that public accommodations measures in no way 'violate' freedom of association or religious liberty.

Last, public accommodations laws are just, proper, and Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

I don't care what some geriatrics in black robes say. Forcing a business to serve anyone for any reason violates free association and forcing someone to act against their religious conscience violates the free exercise of their religion.

A court can say up is down and black is white, but it doesn't make it so.

That's too funny. Who cares what you think of the Supreme Court justices in their black robes? Their opinion matters. Yours? Not so much.

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

 

[Faun]

The fact remains that religious dogma is legally and Constitutionally irrelevant.

And it's a fact of law that public accommodations measures in no way 'violate' freedom of association or religious liberty.

Last, public accommodations laws are just, proper, and Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause.

I don't care what some geriatrics in black robes say. Forcing a business to serve anyone for any reason violates free association and forcing someone to act against their religious conscience violates the free exercise of their religion.

A court can say up is down and black is white, but it doesn't make it so.

That's too funny. Who cares what you think of the Supreme Court justices in their black robes? Their opinion matters. Yours? Not so much.

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

 

[Steinlight]

I don't care what some geriatrics in black robes say. Forcing a business to serve anyone for any reason violates free association and forcing someone to act against their religious conscience violates the free exercise of their religion.

A court can say up is down and black is white, but it doesn't make it so.

That's too funny. Who cares what you think of the Supreme Court justices in their black robes? Their opinion matters. Yours? Not so much.

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

 

[Faun]

That's too funny. Who cares what you think of the Supreme Court justices in their black robes? Their opinion matters. Yours? Not so much.

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

 

[Steinlight]

They can make their proclamations, and are certainly more powerful than me. They have the guns of the state to back up their views, I don't. But it doesn't change that forcing someone to act against their religious conscience or forcing them to associate with those they don't want to violates freedom of religion and free association.

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Again, the Tanakh does not condemn Homosexuality. It condemns two specific homosexual acts with the same force is codemns str8 adultery and masturbation. The act state of being a homosexual is never discussed in the Bible at all.

In fact, the word did not even exist until the 19th century.

Grow up and learn to debate like a real adult.

 

[Steinlight]

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Again, the Tanakh does not condemn Homosexuality. It condemns two specific homosexual acts with the same force is codemns str8 adultery and masturbation. The act state of being a homosexual is never discussed in the Bible at all.

In fact, the word did not even exist until the 19th century.

Grow up and learn to debate like a real adult.

The Bible is not just the first five books. It is the New Testament as well. If you contend that Judaism permits homosexuality, than take it up with your Rabbi.

I am talking about Christianity, which in the New Testament condemns homosexuality in 1 Romans 26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 1 Timothy 1:9-10 .

 

[Faun]

Again, no one is being forced to go against their religion. The Bible doesn't say baking a cake is a sin.

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

 

[Steinlight]

Participating in a ceremony that celebrates a sin is a sin. As I said, read 1 Timothy 5:22, don't share in the sins of others.

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

 

[Faun]

WTF is wrong with you? The ceremony doesn't celebrate gay sex.

The ceremony celebrates a union based in sin.

Again, the sex is the sin. There is no sin in the union itself, which is what a wedding celebrates. A wedding doesn't celebrate sex. And there is nothing in the Bible forbidding two people of the same gender being married to each other. Look at the lengths you're going to to twist the words of the Bible to mean something they don't say. Then again, I'm telling this to the idiot who thought I said the Bible doesn't forbid gay sex.

Yes, there is sin in the union itself, because homosexual attraction is a sin itself, the union is based on a sinful lust and sinful acts like gay sex. It is a celebration of sin. To suggest homosexuals don't get married because they are homosexually attracted to one another and to codify a sexual relationship is absurd. You are the one trying to pervert the bible with some contrived run around.

How about you just stop being a control freak that wants to dictate how people live their lives. For one, not forcing them to bake a cake if they if they don't want to. What people do in their confines of their kitchen is none of your business.

Then quote the Bible where it says two people married to each other of the same gender is a sin......

I don't need to, because it is common sense that if gay sex is a sin and homosexual lust is a sin, than a gay marriage, wherein they are sexually attracted to one another and have gay sex, is a sin.

You are just being obtuse.

And it gets away from the point, what people do in their personal lives, including baking or not baking cakes, making or not making floral arrangements, is not your business.

The fact is -- you can't quote the Bible because it's not in there.

I knew it and now I know you know it too.