Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You're insisting its the responsibility of the gays and lesbians to remedy someone *else's* religiously motivated bigotry.

LOL! See what I mean?

What does it mean when a person seeks out a bakery that is WELL ESTABLISHED AS A CHRISTIAN BAKERY, so that you can order something that directly opposes their well established religious principles, so that you can then SUE THEM and subject them to serious financial injury?

Reason dictates that such is a demonstration of sadism... a form of sexual deviancy, which demonstrates that a sexual deviant is a deviant. And a deviant is one who rejects the standard of normality. That they are a homosexual merely defines them as a person who has no regard for ANY STANDARD... as homosexuality deviates as FAR FROM the human physiological sexual standard as can be achieved, where the subjects at issue REMAIN HUMAN!

Reason further and axiomatically demonstrates intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself; which is to say that such behavior is a demonstration of bigotry.

While it is true that homosexuals are human beings, as was previously noted, it is also true that homosexuals are human beings presenting with severe mental disorder, who should be treated as such.

 

[Ernie S.]

Force me to do something against my will and you sure as hell aren't getting my best effort.

You mean like this? Which one is you?

I see nothing in my religious beliefs that says a negro sitting at a lunch counter is sinful.

But they DID. Why do your beliefs trump theirs?

I don't feel they do and I wouldn't patronize a place that held those beliefs. I would simply visit a lunch counter where I felt welcome. I would expect more care that I would be treated as a valuable customer.

 

[Ernie S.]

Agreed. Gays should seek them out and buy their cakes there.

Gays should be able to buy from anyone doing business with the public. As ordering a cake from a person who sells cake is a reasonable act. Denying cake because of the sexual orientation of the person ordering it isn't.

Why the hell not just go to a different bakery that would be happy to serve you?
Why would you want to force someone who is not motivated to do his best work to serve you?
It makes no sense.

I think that bigotry, and praying to an imaginary friend in the sky is deviant behavior.

The absolutely COOLEST thing about the word "Bigotry", is that the very application OF the word is, by definition: A demonstration of Bigotry.

And I do not seem to be able to get my fill of watching people here, fall victim to that delightful little trap, BY THE GROSS!

LOL! CLASSIC!

And, gay people are human beings and should be treated as such. You are not a freakin football player, so that is a false analogy........a logical fallacy

Anything getting through there?

Football players are human beings and I am a human being and I don't GET to BE a Football Player just because I 'identify' as a FOOTBALL PLAYER. But that is only because I DO NOT QUALIFY TO BE A FOOTBALL PLAYER. Because I don't practice, I don't want to put in the time or expose myself to the pain of BEING such.

It's true tho', that I'm NOT a football player. Of course in my defense I never claimed TO BE ONE.

And still I do not demand that I should be accepted as one, despite that I think it would be cool to be a super celebrity with loads of cash and flash... and all the trappings that come with it... .

But I don't pretend to BE a Football player, BECAUSE I AM NOT DELUDED!

Such is the case for Homosexuals who do not pretend to be NORMAL... thus they do not demand to be provided access to institutions which nature designed exclusively AROUND NORMALITY.

No one here has a beef with those people... Come, shop, spend your money... we're happy to have you in our store... because you're people who behave within the scope of normality, you're not creating a scene or embarrassing other people through deviant, abnormal behavior, so... why would there be a reason to discriminate against you?

However for those of you sexual deviants looking to get into the heterosexual locker room... who expect to be starters within the heterosexual team... we're going to have to ask you to shut the fuck up and sit down, or... if need be, we'll happily show you through the door.

And FYI: we're good either way... .

Well it's pretty apparent that you are anything but normal unless being a pig headed bigot is what you call normal. It apparent that you have no intention of having a rational discussion of the issue so you will now be ignored

Who are you talking to?

Keys. Did something go wrong there?

My name was at the top, but my post was missing.

 

[Seawytch]

Why would any couple want their wedding performed by a Church that was forced to do it....

Or why would they want a Christian to photograph them or bake them a wedding cake if an agenda isn't on their mind? They would'nt, so why are they doing it, and then acting as if they are surprised when the resistance comes?

They aren't surprised, and everyone including them knows this, but they got to play it out.

And by 'agenda' you mean being treated like everyone else?

But that's not really what they're asking for. 'Everyone else' risks being discriminated against every day. Instead of being treated like everyone else, they're asking to be added to the list of groups covered by 'protected classes' legislation. They're asking for the special privilege of forcing people who don't approve of their sexuality to server them regardless.

They most certainly do want to be treated like everyone else. They just want to be able to go into a place of business and not have to think about or worry about whether or not they will be served. JUST LIKE YOU

It is those who believe that they have the right to discriminate in the name of god who want a special privilege to do so.

Most kinds of discrimination aren't illegal. People are discriminated against every day because they're ugly, poor, fat, stupid, etc.... Should those traits also be added to the protected classes list?

In some places it IS illegal to discriminate based on the traits you mentioned.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I think that bigotry, and praying to an imaginary friend in the sky is deviant behavior.

The absolutely COOLEST thing about the word "Bigotry", is that the very application OF the word is, by definition: A demonstration of Bigotry.

And I do not seem to be able to get my fill of watching people here, fall victim to that delightful little trap, BY THE GROSS!

LOL! CLASSIC!

And, gay people are human beings and should be treated as such. You are not a freakin football player, so that is a false analogy........a logical fallacy

Anything getting through there?

But I don't pretend to BE a Football player, BECAUSE I AM NOT DELUDED!
.

LOL........

The irony is hilarious.

So you're still struggling to understand what Irony means?

(Again Reader, this is what 'mental disorder' means. They lack the means to negotiate otherwise common, unambiguous terms and standards.)

 

[Seawytch]

Force me to do something against my will and you sure as hell aren't getting my best effort.

You mean like this? Which one is you?

I see nothing in my religious beliefs that says a negro sitting at a lunch counter is sinful.

But they DID. Why do your beliefs trump theirs?

I don't feel they do and I wouldn't patronize a place that held those beliefs. I would simply visit a lunch counter where I felt welcome. I would expect more care that I would be treated as a valuable customer.

Good for YOU, but that doesn't change the FACT that we did not give religious exemptions to racist bigots. Why do anti gay bigots deserve them?

 

[Skylar]

You're insisting its the responsibility of the gays and lesbians to remedy someone *else's* religiously motivated bigotry.

LOL! See what I mean?

What does it mean when a person seeks out a bakery that is WELL ESTABLISHED AS A CHRISTIAN BAKERY, so that you can order something that directly opposes their well established religious principles, so that you can then SUE THEM and subject them to serious financial injury?

There's no 'well establish religious principle' to deny cake to gays. That's quite new.

And in many states, quite a civil infraction with quite a fine.

Reason dictates that such is a demonstration of sadism... a form of sexual deviancy, which demonstrates that a sexual deviant is a deviant. And a deviant is one who rejects the standard of normality. That they are a homosexual merely defines them as a person who has no regard for ANY STANDARD... as homosexuality deviates as FAR FROM the human physiological sexual standard as can be achieved, where the subjects at issue REMAIN HUMAN!

Ordering a cake is a form of sexual sadism? I don't think you have the slightest clue what you're talking about, buddy.

 

[Syriusly]

You're insisting its the responsibility of the gays and lesbians to remedy someone *else's* religiously motivated bigotry.

While it is true that homosexuals are human beings, as was previously noted,.

Well that is progress- Keys now recognizes homosexuals as human beings.

 

[dblack]

Or why would they want a Christian to photograph them or bake them a wedding cake if an agenda isn't on their mind? They would'nt, so why are they doing it, and then acting as if they are surprised when the resistance comes?

They aren't surprised, and everyone including them knows this, but they got to play it out.

And by 'agenda' you mean being treated like everyone else?

But that's not really what they're asking for. 'Everyone else' risks being discriminated against every day. Instead of being treated like everyone else, they're asking to be added to the list of groups covered by 'protected classes' legislation. They're asking for the special privilege of forcing people who don't approve of their sexuality to server them regardless.

They most certainly do want to be treated like everyone else. They just want to be able to go into a place of business and not have to think about or worry about whether or not they will be served. JUST LIKE YOU

It is those who believe that they have the right to discriminate in the name of god who want a special privilege to do so.

Most kinds of discrimination aren't illegal. People are discriminated against every day because they're ugly, poor, fat, stupid, etc.... Should those traits also be added to the protected classes list?

In some places it IS illegal to discriminate based on the traits you mentioned.

Yep. And how would you answer the question? If anyone should be protected from discrimination, why shouldn't everyone?

 

[Ernie S.]

Force me to do something against my will and you sure as hell aren't getting my best effort.

You mean like this? Which one is you?

I see nothing in my religious beliefs that says a negro sitting at a lunch counter is sinful.

But they DID. Why do your beliefs trump theirs?

I don't feel they do and I wouldn't patronize a place that held those beliefs. I would simply visit a lunch counter where I felt welcome. I would expect more care that I would be treated as a valuable customer.

Good for YOU, but that doesn't change the FACT that we did not give religious exemptions to racist bigots. Why do anti gay bigots deserve them?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

It's all very simple.

 

[Syriusly]

I think that bigotry, and praying to an imaginary friend in the sky is deviant behavior.

The absolutely COOLEST thing about the word "Bigotry", is that the very application OF the word is, by definition: A demonstration of Bigotry.

And I do not seem to be able to get my fill of watching people here, fall victim to that delightful little trap, BY THE GROSS!

LOL! CLASSIC!

And, gay people are human beings and should be treated as such. You are not a freakin football player, so that is a false analogy........a logical fallacy

Anything getting through there?

But I don't pretend to BE a Football player, BECAUSE I AM NOT DELUDED!
.

LOL........

The irony is hilarious.

So you're still struggling to understand what Irony means?

(Again Reader, this is what 'mental disorder' means. They lack the means to negotiate otherwise common, unambiguous terms and standards.)

LOL.......Keys: "BECAUSE I AM NOT DELUDED!"

 

[Skylar]

And many Christians see nothing in their religious beliefs that says selling a wedding cake is sinful.

Agreed. Gays should seek them out and buy their cakes there.

Gays should be able to buy from anyone doing business with the public. As ordering a cake from a person who sells cake is a reasonable act. Denying cake because of the sexual orientation of the person ordering it isn't.

Why the hell not just go to a different bakery that would be happy to serve you?

Why should they have to hunt for a baker that isn't going to project his religious bigotry upon them? Again, the actions of the gays and lesbians in question are completely reasonable: order a cake from a person that sells cake. The response they face isn't reasonable.

You're insisting its the responsibility of the gays and lesbians to remedy someone *else's* religiously motivated bigotry. I disagree. Gays and lesbians are not responsible for the bigotry they face. And Its not their responsibility to remedy it.

Not rationally, and not under the law.

You can't answer a direct question......

I did: because they shouldn't have to. They have no responsibility to remedy someone else's religiously motivated bigotry.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

In some places it IS illegal to discriminate based on the traits you mentioned.

Of course it is... because those making the law are Relativists, who lack the objectivity to understand that discrimination is a trait essential to human viability.

Such is evil... and set upon the Godless by God.

I doubt anyone has better framed the issue than Linda kimball, who noted such as follows:

""And I will give children to be their princes, and the effeminate shall rule over them." Isaiah 3:4

In turning away from the Spirit of God and the truth He has given, 'wise' males will become effeminate cowards and females mannish. They will be adolescent emotional-tyrants in adult-size bodies: sinister, greedy, spiteful, vindictive, treacherous, back-stabbing sophists. They will celebrate Lucifer (the devil) and in their madness actively seek the way of Luciferian initiation because they will be spiritually blind in regard to total reality. Like demons they will flee from the cross of Jesus but exalt the devil as the first free thinker, the genetic creator of man, the seething energy and angel of evolution. Truth will be lies, evil will be good, unfaithfulness will be faith and the 'wise' will preach and blaspheme from pulpits, exercise political power, enact legislation, and wield broken law to plunder, punish, and ruin.

Zarathustra has been right on both counts. First, apostatizing W. Europe and America, though dotted here and there by small islands of Light, decency and sanity, are becoming darkened, satanically inverted places ruled by the 'wise,' hence boiling over with madness, particularly Hollywood, academia, mainstream media and the highest, most powerful political offices in the land. Second, Nietzsche was made to show the 'wise' what is in store for them by spending the last eleven years of his life insane."

 

[Skylar]

You mean like this? Which one is you?

I see nothing in my religious beliefs that says a negro sitting at a lunch counter is sinful.

But they DID. Why do your beliefs trump theirs?

I don't feel they do and I wouldn't patronize a place that held those beliefs. I would simply visit a lunch counter where I felt welcome. I would expect more care that I would be treated as a valuable customer.

Good for YOU, but that doesn't change the FACT that we did not give religious exemptions to racist bigots. Why do anti gay bigots deserve them?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

It's all very simple.

So what laws couldn't a christian ignore if they claim it 'prohibits the free exercise of religion'. Remembering of course that religious is spectacularly subjective and interpretative. And can mean pretty much whatever the adherent of the faith says it means.

 

[Ernie S.]

Off to work. Have fun, y'all.

 

[Skylar]

In some places it IS illegal to discriminate based on the traits you mentioned.

Of course it is... because those making the law are Relativists, who lack the objectivity to understand that discrimination is a trait essential to human viability.

How is say, denying service at a lunch counter to a black person 'essential to human viability'. I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.

Such is evil... and set upon the Godless by God.

Which 'god'? Remember, you're offering us your subjective interpreation of 'god', backed by nothing more than your subjective faith. There's nothing logical or rational that supports your interpretation. Its an interpretation of faith supported by an interpretation of faith. With the evidence and the conclusion being the exact same thing.

Also known as circular reasoning. Which is a known fallacy of logic.

And there's no objectively valid system of truth that is based on logical fallacies. While yours most certainly is.

 

[Skylar]

Off to work. Have fun, y'all.

Bye Ernie. Drive safe.

 

[Seawytch]

You mean like this? Which one is you?

I see nothing in my religious beliefs that says a negro sitting at a lunch counter is sinful.

But they DID. Why do your beliefs trump theirs?

I don't feel they do and I wouldn't patronize a place that held those beliefs. I would simply visit a lunch counter where I felt welcome. I would expect more care that I would be treated as a valuable customer.

Good for YOU, but that doesn't change the FACT that we did not give religious exemptions to racist bigots. Why do anti gay bigots deserve them?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

It's all very simple.

It is simple. We did not allow religious exemptions for racist bigots. PA laws were found Constitutional at the FEDERAL level.

Why do you believe anti gay bigots should be given considerations NOT given racist bigots?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The Sound Of Silence: Fundamentalist DJ Company In Md. Refuses To Work Gay Man’s Birthday Party The Sound Of Silence Fundamentalist DJ Company In Md. Refuses To Work Gay Man s Birthday Party Americans United

Here is an excellent illustration of why we cannot allow individuals who are providing a service in a public accommodation to decide who they are going to provide that service to on the basis of their religion:

Selected excerpts:


[How far does the Religious Right intend to go with its argument that “religious freedom” shields Christians who refuse to serve entire groups of people? The recent case of a Maryland disc jockey who declined to provide his services for a gay man’s birthday party may offer some insight.

Tom Tsakounis, who is gay, wanted to throw a birthday party for his roommate, another gay man. Tsakounis’ sister contacted Ultrasound Deejays to see if they would provide music for the party. But Michael Lampiris, who co-owns Ultrasound, refused to take the job after learning the details of the event.]

[Lampiris also offered some pretty extensive disclaimers (again, emphasis is his, as is the haphazard capitalization): “We will not play music that contains profanity or vulgarity; We will not support a new teen dance style called ‘freaking’; We will not tolerate provocative dancing or actions; We will not participate with strippers or be involved in any event with strippers; We will not be involved in any event with fortune tellers, psychics, or magicians; We will not be involved in any event that celebrates Halloween; We will not be involved in any event involving homosexual celebration or activity. We follow biblical morality; and We do not work on Sundays.”]

[Would he work an atheist wedding? Would he turn away an opposite-sex couple if he suspected the bride was not a virgin? There seems to be almost no limit to Lampiris’ religious-based refusals.

And what if Lampiris learned, during a party, that a single gay guest was in attendance? Would he instruct his DJ to pack up his equipment and go home? Would he issue a refund?]

[But the most important question of all is, what does any of this have to do with religious beliefs? It’s hard to say, and that’s the problem. Anyone could claim a religious objection to almost any activity, and if the Religious Right gets its way and discrimination is protected by the states, there could be dozens of Lampirises coming out of the woodwork.

This case is an extreme one. Most fundamentalists have only refused to provide services for same-sex weddings, but Lampiris is simply taking those objections to their logical conclusion. He thinks his beliefs give him a right to serve – or turn away – anyone he wants whether or not it has anything to do with actual religion.]

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

There's no 'well establish religious principle' to deny cake to gays. That's quite new.

There's no one "denying cakes to sexual deviants".

There are only people refusing to create custom decorated cakes which are to be used in celebrations codifying perversion.

And that's a long established scriptural no, no. But for obvious reasons.

Where on participates in the celebration of evil, one joins with evil and that's death... .

FYI: "DEATH" is BAD! Therefore... 'evil' is BAD!

Now, to help you through this, I want you to recall your lessons with regard to Fire... remember that FIRE is "HOT!" and that because fire is HOT, you were taught that you needed to be VERY CAREFUL with FIRE!

"Death", "Evil" and "BAD!" is very similar, only "HOTTER!"

Do you understand?