Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

DBLACK SAID:

“I'm not interested in the current legal status quo.”

One of the many failings of 'libertarianism.'

DBLACK SAID:

“If we're going to have laws forcing merchants or services providers to serve protected classes, why should Churches get a pass?”

Because churches are non-profit entities that are not considered part of the local marketplace, consequently they don't meet the criteria of a business subject to public accommodations laws.

DBLACK SAID:

“Is the purpose of the First Amendment to give religions special exemptions from laws the rest of us must follow?”

The issue has nothing to do with the First Amendment, public accommodations laws are necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policy authorized by the Commerce Clause, regulatory policy that comports with the Free Exercise Clause.

The purpose of the First Amendment is to address the relationship of government with those governed, to protect citizens from being compelled to obey religious dogma through force of law (Establishment Clause), and to allow citizens to engage in religious expression – or to be free from faith altogether – absent unwarranted interference by the state (Free Exercise Clause).

Consequently, churches are not 'getting a pass' with regard to accommodating same-sex couples, as the two situations are completed unrelated, one having nothing to do with the other.

 

[daws101]

This would violate the freedom of religion.

I agree. If government approved churches were exempted from the law, it would be a blatant violation of the First Amendment.

Perhaps, they can establish their own religion. Christianity and homosexuality are incompatible.

Absolute bullshit.

Why?

Why not.

 

[PratchettFan]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen. And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen. The courts won't go for it. Churches are not businesses open to the general public. They are, in essence, private clubs.

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

Are you a member of the Catholic church?

 

[daws101]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen. And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen. The courts won't go for it. Churches are not businesses open to the general public. They are, in essence, private clubs.

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

Are you a member of the Catholic church?

Can you read?
I was a Mormon
I gave up religion for reality.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen.

Guaranteed, it will, if it hasn't already.

And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen.

Irrelevant to my point.

 

[Ernie S.]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen. And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen. The courts won't go for it. Churches are not businesses open to the general public. They are, in essence, private clubs.

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

So you took part in the sacrament under false pretenses. How very..... Democrat of you. hillary would be so proud.

 

[daws101]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen.

Guaranteed, it will, if it hasn't already.

And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen.

Irrelevant to my point.

It hasn't and it won't. See I can make shit up too.

 

[daws101]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen. And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen. The courts won't go for it. Churches are not businesses open to the general public. They are, in essence, private clubs.

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

So you took part in the sacrament under false pretenses. How very..... Democrat of you. hillary would be so proud.

No more false than the pretenses it was given under.
btw there are as many religious democrats as religious republicans.
Fun fact more republicans have been convicted of criminal activity than democrats.

 

[Ernie S.]

You you think your lack of belief justifies your violation of mine?

 

[Unkotare]

Places of worship get a pass. Businesses are not places of worship. Next.

Wow, really? Does that go for all laws? Or are we just picking and choosing for convenience sake?

Are you suggesting we should remove the protected and tax-exempt status of churches and force them to perform gay weddings?

No matter what churches claim they are businesses and should be taxed.
Nowhere in the bible does god say thou shall not pay taxes.
It does say rendered unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's.

You cite the Bible when you should be reading the Constitution.

 

[Unkotare]

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen. And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen. The courts won't go for it. Churches are not businesses open to the general public. They are, in essence, private clubs.

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

So you took part in the sacrament under false pretenses. How very..... Democrat of you. hillary would be so proud.

Fun fact more republicans have been convicted of criminal activity than democrats.

Link?

 

[daws101]

You you think your lack of belief justifies your violation of mine?

Why not you faux Christians seem duty bound to violate everybody else's rights and beliefs.

 

[daws101]

Places of worship get a pass. Businesses are not places of worship. Next.

Wow, really? Does that go for all laws? Or are we just picking and choosing for convenience sake?

Are you suggesting we should remove the protected and tax-exempt status of churches and force them to perform gay weddings?

No matter what churches claim they are businesses and should be taxed.
Nowhere in the bible does god say thou shall not pay taxes.
It does say rendered unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's.

You cite the Bible when you should be reading the Constitution.

Done both frequently. You finished ?

 

[PratchettFan]

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen. And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen. The courts won't go for it. Churches are not businesses open to the general public. They are, in essence, private clubs.

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

Are you a member of the Catholic church?

Can you read?
I was a Mormon
I gave up religion for reality.

Can I read? Yes. But I can't read minds. If you took communion in a Catholic church then you misrepresented yourself to the priest. They took you at your word. It's not their fault you lied. Of course, if the communion was in a Mormon church then the problem was just that you took part in a ritual you didn't believe in. But the reason you could take part was not that you believed, it was that you were a member of the club.

 

[daws101]

Places of worship get a pass. Businesses are not places of worship. Next.

Wow, really? Does that go for all laws? Or are we just picking and choosing for convenience sake?

Are you suggesting we should remove the protected and tax-exempt status of churches and force them to perform gay weddings?

No matter what churches claim they are businesses and should be taxed.
Nowhere in the bible does god say thou shall not pay taxes.
It does say rendered unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's.

You cite the Bible when you should be reading the Constitution.

Done both frequently. You finished ?

Btw should is relative and subjective.

 

[PratchettFan]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

No, it isn't. It's not going to happen.

Guaranteed, it will, if it hasn't already.

And even if some people were silly enough to scream for it, screaming is all that is going to happen.

Irrelevant to my point.

Your point is that some idiot with no authority at all might express an opinion no one will bother listening to? Am I supposed to be concerned about that?

 

[daws101]

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

So you took part in the sacrament under false pretenses. How very..... Democrat of you. hillary would be so proud.

Fun fact more republicans have been convicted of criminal activity than democrats.

Link?

Look it up yourself.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It is only a matter of time before the extremist left starts screaming for the state to force churches to perform marriages for same-sex couples.
Hopefully, those moderates on the left will stand up and disagree.

This fails as a straw man fallacy.

14th Amendment jurisprudence applies solely to government, not private persons or organizations such as churches.

Same-sex couples are eligible to enter into marriage contracts, some states sought to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law in violation of the 14th Amendment, where same-sex couples filed suit to seek relief from state measures intended to disadvantage gay Americans.

No such conflict exists with regard to churches that refuse to perform religious marriage rituals for same-sex couples, as churches are not public sector lawmaking entities subject to Constitutional case law.

Moreover, no lawmaker would propose such a measure, compelling churches to accommodate same-sex couples; such a measure would clearly violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, it would gain no support from other lawmakers, and be invalidated by the courts should such a measure become law.

Indeed, liberals have consistently been fierce advocates, defenders, and champions of First Amendment jurisprudence, opposing any and all measures seeking to conjoin church and state, and measures intended to violate religious liberty, rendering your 'prediction' that much more ridiculous and idiotic.

 

[daws101]

If that's true then they should stop saying everyone is welcome.
It implies it's public.

If you want to receive communion in a Catholic church, you have to be a Catholic. If you want to be baptized in a Lutheran church, you have to be a Lutheran. Sure, you can come in and watch, but to really take part you have to join.

Really I've taken communion on several occasions and I'm an atheist.

Are you a member of the Catholic church?

Can you read?
I was a Mormon
I gave up religion for reality.

Can I read? Yes. But I can't read minds. If you took communion in a Catholic church then you misrepresented yourself to the priest. They took you at your word. It's not their fault you lied. Of course, if the communion was in a Mormon church then the problem was just that you took part in a ritual you didn't believe in. But the reason you could take part was not that you believed, it was that you were a member of the club.

False it was offered and I took it.

 

[dblack]

No, churches should not be forced to perform gay marriages if they are against them.

Why?

There are plenty of other churches who will be more than happy to marry them (and get the fee for the wedding).

Should bakers be forced to bake cakes for gay weddings if they are against them? Why should churches get a pass? If you think that's how the First Amendment should be applied, do you see the problems that introduces? Should churches that believe in human sacrifice get to skip the laws against murder?

Hyperbole much?

Not at at all. It's a legitimate question about the principles we're dealing with. It's a hypothetical to test the soundness of the premise. If a there was a church, of let's say - four people - who were into human sacrifice. Would they be able to ignore laws against murder? Of course we would not (or at least I'd hope you'd agree with that assumption) allow them to do that.

The bottom line here is that the point of the First Amendment's religion clause is not there to exempt religions from the law. It's there to prevent government from enforcing laws that target religions for special treatment (either for, or against). Our founders had seen the problems with letting religious power and government power join forces. It gets ugly quick. So the included a "wall of separation" to prevent it. But the intent was never to give religions a 'get out of jail free' card.