Should people have to perform/provide services for gay weddings?

[sfcalifornia]

LOL.....what does Genesis mean?

Since you'd like to discuss logic humor me.

I practice no religion.

Well I don't really care what Genesis means, whether the bible is logical or whether you practice religion or not.

The KJV clearly states: [god] called THEIR name Adam and when antiquity pointed that out, you said it was the most ridiculous thing you've seen typed.

If you had bothered to look it up, you'd see antiquity is correct.

So you deny that it says in chapter 4 that Adam knew his wife eve.

Very "logical" of you.

gen·e·sis (jn-ss)
n. pl.gen·e·ses (-sz)
1. The coming into being of something; the origin. See Synonyms at beginning.

Yawn you are boring.

So you're saying Gen 5:2 doesn't clearly state: [he] called THEIR name Adam?

 

[The Rabbi]

Not sure about that... Adam and eve were not the ONLY people in the world. They were just the start of the family line that made the Christ.

They were initially the only people. Everyone else is descended from them.
And even they shared the same DNA, Eve coming from Adam's rib. But given how Adam was created it isnt a problem.

By insisting everyone is descendant from one set of parents, you are saying Adam and Eve's sons and daughters populated the world strictly through incestuous relationships.

Ridiculous fairy-tale. Genetically impossible.

It's ridiculous because? You never thought of it before? WHy is it genetically impossible? I dont think so.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Poor Joe, don't hate me because I called you out on your latest lies.

I hate you because you're simple and you're proud of it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Genesis 4

King James Version (KJV)


4 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord.

2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.


4 comes bfore 5...right?

Its too easy.

WHERE does logic play any part in any bible? There's your first mistake.

Are you denying Gen 5:2 doesn't clearly state: ...and called THEIR name Adam?

So what?

 

[Unkotare]

my customer base is strongly Christian or Catholic

You do know that Catholics are Christians don't you?

Not according to the bible they're not. Thanks for your input though.

You're an old fraud and you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Unkotare]

Catholic Charities, which had helped place thousands and thousands of children with loving, adoptive families for many years, had to get stop their work on adoption-placement because 'da gubment' was going to force them to place children with homosexual couples - to violate the beliefs of their faith. Now, all those children they had been helping have a much lower chance of finding a family to love and support them. Way to go 'gubment'!

The old "chew off your nose to spite your face" routine.

I suppose they should just have picked the lesser of two evils?

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

 

[bodecea]

The old "chew off your nose to spite your face" routine.

I suppose they should just have picked the lesser of two evils?

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No one in government is stopping the Catholic Church....just not paying for it, that's all. But you are a Big Government kind of guy?

 

[Seawytch]

Does your religion forbid it?

Some religions are against gays and we can't make people go against their religion.

The same bible that's used as an excuse to discriminate against gays was used to discriminate against blacks. A judge even used the bible as justification for anti-miscegenation laws. That's okay?

No, it's never okay to twist religion to discriminate against people because of color or to harm people in any way because they don't share your religion. I also would appreciate links to determine whether your statement is accurate. If it is, it's wrong. Period.

Slavery
In the 19th century, religious leaders frequently used the Bible to justify the institution of slavery. George Armstrong, an influential protestant, wrote The Christian Doctrine of Slavery, an 1857 book that defended the practice of slavery as acceptable in Christianity.[iii] Armstrong argued that slavery was not a “sin or offense”.[iv] He presented several arguments for this position including the fact that neither Jesus Christ nor his apostles taught that slave holding was a sin. Armstrong also argued that slaveholders were commonly welcomed in the church without comment or condemnation.[v] He used portions of the New Testament to justify this position, specifically, Ephesians 6:5-9, which promotes “servants to be obedient to masters.”[vi] [...]

Segregation
Segregationists made similar biblical arguments to oppose integration efforts in the 20th century.[xxix] They used Genesis 9:18-29 to make the case that God approves of segregation. These verses tell the story of the separation of people after the flood through division of the sons of Noah.[xxx] Additionally, the curse of Ham in Genesis, discussed above, was offered to justify segregation.[xxxi] Segregation supporters also used the Genesis story about the confusion of tongues at Babel (Genesis 11:1-9) to argue that God believes the races should be kept separate.[xxxii] Another frequently used Bible passage was Leviticus 19:19 which forbids a mixing of certain animals, plants, or fabrics.

The Bible Tells Me So

Most religions don't approve of gays and there is little you can do to change their minds.

The leaders within the religion may not, but they better check with their flocks...

Majorities of non-Christian religiously affiliated Americans (67%), Catholics (52%), and white mainline Protestants (51%) favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry.

On the other hand, 6-in-10 (60%) African American Protestants and approximately three-quarters (76%) of white evangelical Protestants oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry.​

Survey | Generations at Odds: The Millennial Generation and the Future of Gay and Lesbian Rights

We won't be the ones forcing them, it will be their pocketbooks...Because their intolerance is turning folks off.

Putnam says that in the past two decades, many young people began to view organized religion as a source of "intolerance and rigidity and doctrinaire political views," and therefore stopped going to church.

Young Americans Losing Their Religion

In this country, we have separation of church and state, so unless you're Muslim and your religion is your government, then we have to separate religious beliefs from our laws. I also think that private businesses have the right to discriminate. If people don't approve, then the business will not thrive. And who wants to help a business profit if they are hateful enough to refuse service or jobs to minorities?

Then you need to repeal the Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act and a whole shitload of state's public accommodation laws. Isn't it funny that we haven't heard much complaint about public accommodation laws until just recently? I wonder why?

 

[Seawytch]

that Adam and eve were the only people made or even the first made? God made man the bible didn't say God just made Adam. God made Adam, Eve cause he was unhappy the bible didn't say that women weren't already made prior.

Gen 5:2 for starters. It is clear these were the only two humans created by G-d.

So...the bible promotes incest. I see.


I suppose you actually believe that load.

I don't recall Lott getting punished for it...

 

[Seawytch]

The old "chew off your nose to spite your face" routine.

I suppose they should just have picked the lesser of two evils?

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No, the Church could have continued to operate as an adoption agency...without "big daddy gubmit" money. They chose not to. Guess they didn't want to go to Papa Pope to cash in some capes or candlesticks.

 

[Unkotare]

I suppose they should just have picked the lesser of two evils?

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No one in government is stopping the Catholic Church....

Yes, they did. Catholic Charities stopped their very successful work on adoption services when Massachusetts passed a law requiring ANY organization that provided such services to make them available to gay couples as well.

 

[Unkotare]

I suppose they should just have picked the lesser of two evils?

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No, the Church could have continued to operate as an adoption agency...without "big daddy gubmit" money. .

That was not the circumstance, as I have just explained.

 

[bodecea]

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No one in government is stopping the Catholic Church....

Yes, they did. Catholic Charities stopped their very successful work on adoption services when Massachusetts passed a law requiring ANY organization that provided such services to make them available to gay couples as well.

ONLY ONLY ONLY if they took government funds. See how that works?

 

[Katzndogz]

Not sure about that... Adam and eve were not the ONLY people in the world. They were just the start of the family line that made the Christ.

They were initially the only people. Everyone else is descended from them.
And even they shared the same DNA, Eve coming from Adam's rib. But given how Adam was created it isnt a problem.

By insisting everyone is descendant from one set of parents, you are saying Adam and Eve's sons and daughters populated the world strictly through incestuous relationships.

Ridiculous fairy-tale. Genetically impossible.

It's Biblically impossible. The Bible is quite clear that Cain left the Garden and married. He didn' t marry his sister so we know there were other people in the world.

 

[bodecea]

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No, the Church could have continued to operate as an adoption agency...without "big daddy gubmit" money. .

That was not the circumstance, as I have just explained.

You explained wrong.

 

[Seawytch]

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No, the Church could have continued to operate as an adoption agency...without "big daddy gubmit" money. .

That was not the circumstance, as I have just explained.

You are mistaken..

During a recent episode of MaineWatch on the Maine Public Broadcasting Network, an anti-marriage activist said that Catholic Charities in Boston was forced to stop its adoption services because Massachusetts allows same-sex couples to marry.

While the claim has been repeated across Maine many times, it is not true.

This is a shameful distortion of what actually happened.

I should know. I was the chairman of the board of directors for Catholic Charities of Boston.

Peter Meade: Truth about adoptions has been distorted, twisted

 

[bodecea]

They were initially the only people. Everyone else is descended from them.
And even they shared the same DNA, Eve coming from Adam's rib. But given how Adam was created it isnt a problem.

By insisting everyone is descendant from one set of parents, you are saying Adam and Eve's sons and daughters populated the world strictly through incestuous relationships.

Ridiculous fairy-tale. Genetically impossible.

It's Biblically impossible. The Bible is quite clear that Cain left the Garden and married. He didn' t marry his sister so we know there were other people in the world.

So...god did not create man if there were others in the world...just that one little cute couple in the garden.

 

[Noomi]

They government should have adhered to the First Amendment, allowed Catholic Charities to continue to good work they were doing, and allowed, encouraged, or even established some organization that included or even catered to homosexual couples looking to adopt (if they could muster the public support to do so). Liberals were so eager to 'punish' the Catholic Church that they didn't care if orphaned children had to be trampled on to do so. Typical.

No one in government is stopping the Catholic Church....

Yes, they did. Catholic Charities stopped their very successful work on adoption services when Massachusetts passed a law requiring ANY organization that provided such services to make them available to gay couples as well.

And they claimed they were 'forced' to stop their work - they were not. They chose to stop their work because they were so hateful of homosexuals.

 

[Antares]

By insisting everyone is descendant from one set of parents, you are saying Adam and Eve's sons and daughters populated the world strictly through incestuous relationships.

Ridiculous fairy-tale. Genetically impossible.

It's Biblically impossible. The Bible is quite clear that Cain left the Garden and married. He didn' t marry his sister so we know there were other people in the world.

So...god did not create man if there were others in the world...just that one little cute couple in the garden.

So....you mated with who????

Steve or Eve?

 

[Unkotare]

No one in government is stopping the Catholic Church....

Yes, they did. Catholic Charities stopped their very successful work on adoption services when Massachusetts passed a law requiring ANY organization that provided such services to make them available to gay couples as well.

ONLY ONLY ONLY if they took government funds. See how that works?

NO, that is NOT the way the law that was passed in Massachusetts works.