Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Forcing them to go against their religious beliefs isn't discriminating them for their beliefs?
How are they being forced to go against their religious beliefs?? Are THEY being forced to engage in homosexual acts? They are making pizzas, arranging flowers or baking cakes. That is all.
No they are being forced to cater to a group that in their belief system is an abomination and they wish not to.
It is an "abomination"?? Really?? And how do they determine this?
That they determinate it, is what matters, not how.
Oh? So I could determine that my religion calls blacks an "abomination" and I could open a restaurant and bar them from sitting at the counter?
I can say that my religion calls you an abomination, and refuse to serve you? Good to know. Absolute nonsense, but good to know.
Yes they are. They are doing something to help make a gay wedding take place. And who said these same people do not object to providing flowers for muslim or hindu weddings ? I haven't heard that. Maybe they do object to that. I'm not of the same religion as these people, but even if I was, I wouldn't go around casting judgement on them like you are. Who are you to tell them what they may or may not believe is right for their religion ? Are you some kind of expert on their religion ? I don't even now what their religion is, do you ?In the case of Christians and gays, it is impossible for someone to not be discriminated against. Discrimination is not necessarily a bad thing. It is done all the time by all of us. What matters is how it is done, and for what reason.
In the case of Indiana and Arkansas, the governors chose to discriminate against the Christians, while letting the gays have their way. Should have been the reverse.
How are christians being discriminated against? By not allowing them to discriminate? lol
If christians do not want to follow the laws of the land, where dealing with people is concerned, then they should do like the Amish. Otherwise, you follow the basic rules.
Forcing them to go against their religious beliefs isn't discriminating them for their beliefs?
How are they being forced to go against their religious beliefs?? Are THEY being forced to engage in homosexual acts? They are making pizzas, arranging flowers or baking cakes. That is all.
They are being forced to go against their religious beliefs, they believe, by having to participate in something which is against their religion (ie. same sex marriage)
They are not participants. They are paid to provide a service. Since they are a business open to the public, they have to follow certain rules.
Its funny that these same people do not object to providing flowers for muslim or hindu weddings. They don't mind making cakes for atheist weddings. They don't mind working on the sabbath. But somehow baking a cake and selling it to a gay couple puts their soul in danger. lmao Absolutely ridiculous.
Just another example of people trying to justify hatred by using their religion. It was done against blacks, jews, and women. It didn't work then and won't work now.
In the case of Christians and gays, it is impossible for someone to not be discriminated against. Discrimination is not necessarily a bad thing. It is done all the time by all of us. What matters is how it is done, and for what reason.
In the case of Indiana and Arkansas, the governors chose to discriminate against the Christians, while letting the gays have their way. Should have been the reverse.
How are christians being discriminated against? By not allowing them to discriminate? lol
If christians do not want to follow the laws of the land, where dealing with people is concerned, then they should do like the Amish. Otherwise, you follow the basic rules.
Forcing them to go against their religious beliefs isn't discriminating them for their beliefs?
How are they being forced to go against their religious beliefs?? Are THEY being forced to engage in homosexual acts? They are making pizzas, arranging flowers or baking cakes. That is all.
No they are being forced to cater to a group that in their belief system is an abomination and they wish not to.
It is an "abomination"?? Really?? And how do they determine this?
Of course it is. The deniars of that are talking ridiculous.
No, not ridiculous at all. These pizza makers, bakers and florists are not being forced to engage in any hoosexual behavior. They are simply being told if they open a business to the public they open it to everyone in the public. They are being paid to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers. That the people eating the cake are gay or straight does not effect their religion at all.
Of course they're being forced to engage in homosexual behavior, by being part of a homosexual wedding. And being told if they open a business to the public, they open it to everyone in the public, is absolutely outrageous and smacks of fascism. Should every owner of a women's shoe store be required to sell men's shoes too ? Should every seller of guitars have to also sell pianos, to satisfy the piano players ? What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,. And it isn't who is eating the cake that is the issue, it is the store workers having to participate in a homosexual activity. Get it ?
" What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,"
The underlined and bold is the bullshit.
They open a business to the public, they are not required to carry everything in stock that is even vaguely related to their shop, as your ridiculous post suggests. But they are required to do business with the public. They cannot discriminate against gays, blacks, jews, muslims, men, women, or any other subgroup that they decide they find unacceptable.
And the store is not participating in homosexual activity. The homosexual activity will take place on the honeymoon. The bakery is simply baking a cake and being paid by homosexuals.
No....the wedding is the activity....and they are protected from participating by the Constitution...regardless of what the Supreme Court says....they also said separate but equal was right as well..........
Yes, the wedding is the activity for which the cake was bought. And the wedding is recognized by the state.
But to claim that the baker is being forced to participate in homosexual activity, simply because he baked a cake for a gay wedding, is absolutely ridiculous.
No, every sexual act not aimed at reproduction is NOT unnatural. If it is between a man and woman with mating body parts it is natural. Reproduction has nothing to do with it. Who ever said it did ?Every sexual act that is not aimed at reproduction is, therefore, unnatural. Having sex and using birth control is unnatural. Oral sex between a man and a woman is unnatural.
So lets make sure all those involved in "unnatural acts" are treated the same. M'kay?
Those parts, according to your claims, are made for reproduction. Any use of them in non-reproductive ways or use of them along with birth control is unnatural.
You mean they have to hold it forever, they can't piss anymore? Wow, that's sadistic, dude.
How are christians being discriminated against? By not allowing them to discriminate? lol
If christians do not want to follow the laws of the land, where dealing with people is concerned, then they should do like the Amish. Otherwise, you follow the basic rules.
Forcing them to go against their religious beliefs isn't discriminating them for their beliefs?
How are they being forced to go against their religious beliefs?? Are THEY being forced to engage in homosexual acts? They are making pizzas, arranging flowers or baking cakes. That is all.
No they are being forced to cater to a group that in their belief system is an abomination and they wish not to.
It is an "abomination"?? Really?? And how do they determine this?
Lev. 18:22 for starters.
Irrelevant to the topic.Natural usage is related to the design of body parts. If I was acting in an unnatural way, I would want and expect to be treated that I was acting unnaturally. If you love the deranged person, you help him to overcome his ailment by explaining it is deranged. You don't help him by encouraging him to continue to act deranged.Natural usage would indicate a perspective relative to pro creation..Yet humans are capable of controlling reproduction unlike animals...Elderly couples get married because of love, not for reproduction...If two humans of the same sex want to live that whey I have no problem with it, because of the hope involved with love between humans...NO. "Anything" exhibited by animals is NOT natural. Homosexuality is exhibited by various species of animals, and being contrary to nature (design of body parts and functions) is thereby not natural."Contrary to nature."
Anything exhibited by nature or non-human animals is "natural" yes? So what about the several hundred species of animals exhibiting homosexual behaviours and preferences? Sounds pretty "natural" to me.
Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality Yale Scientific Magazine
Homosexuality sounds natural to you, because you don't have a correct definition of "natural".
The toxic shame that religious people addicted to religion spread is not helping the cause of what was Jesus' words when he spoke of loving each other, and that was to treat others, as you would want to be treated....if you love the sinner but hate the sin, how can you show them the light and be a positive force, feeding the soul the bread of God? If you are mean and turn them away?
Every sexual act that is not aimed at reproduction is, therefore, unnatural. Having sex and using birth control is unnatural. Oral sex between a man and a woman is unnatural.
So lets make sure all those involved in "unnatural acts" are treated the same. M'kay?
Quite a few animals have non-procreative sex. Bottlenose dolphins, bonobo chimpanzees are two that come instantly to mind.
No, not ridiculous at all. These pizza makers, bakers and florists are not being forced to engage in any hoosexual behavior. They are simply being told if they open a business to the public they open it to everyone in the public. They are being paid to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers. That the people eating the cake are gay or straight does not effect their religion at all.
Of course they're being forced to engage in homosexual behavior, by being part of a homosexual wedding. And being told if they open a business to the public, they open it to everyone in the public, is absolutely outrageous and smacks of fascism. Should every owner of a women's shoe store be required to sell men's shoes too ? Should every seller of guitars have to also sell pianos, to satisfy the piano players ? What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,. And it isn't who is eating the cake that is the issue, it is the store workers having to participate in a homosexual activity. Get it ?
" What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,"
The underlined and bold is the bullshit.
They open a business to the public, they are not required to carry everything in stock that is even vaguely related to their shop, as your ridiculous post suggests. But they are required to do business with the public. They cannot discriminate against gays, blacks, jews, muslims, men, women, or any other subgroup that they decide they find unacceptable.
And the store is not participating in homosexual activity. The homosexual activity will take place on the honeymoon. The bakery is simply baking a cake and being paid by homosexuals.
No....the wedding is the activity....and they are protected from participating by the Constitution...regardless of what the Supreme Court says....they also said separate but equal was right as well..........
Yes, the wedding is the activity for which the cake was bought. And the wedding is recognized by the state.
But to claim that the baker is being forced to participate in homosexual activity, simply because he baked a cake for a gay wedding, is absolutely ridiculous.
No it isn't...considering they are facing fines and jail time..........that is incredibly serious...over one cake.....that could be baked at any other bakery............
Irrelevant to the topic.Natural usage is related to the design of body parts. If I was acting in an unnatural way, I would want and expect to be treated that I was acting unnaturally. If you love the deranged person, you help him to overcome his ailment by explaining it is deranged. You don't help him by encouraging him to continue to act deranged.Natural usage would indicate a perspective relative to pro creation..Yet humans are capable of controlling reproduction unlike animals...Elderly couples get married because of love, not for reproduction...If two humans of the same sex want to live that whey I have no problem with it, because of the hope involved with love between humans...NO. "Anything" exhibited by animals is NOT natural. Homosexuality is exhibited by various species of animals, and being contrary to nature (design of body parts and functions) is thereby not natural.
Homosexuality sounds natural to you, because you don't have a correct definition of "natural".
The toxic shame that religious people addicted to religion spread is not helping the cause of what was Jesus' words when he spoke of loving each other, and that was to treat others, as you would want to be treated....if you love the sinner but hate the sin, how can you show them the light and be a positive force, feeding the soul the bread of God? If you are mean and turn them away?
Every sexual act that is not aimed at reproduction is, therefore, unnatural. Having sex and using birth control is unnatural. Oral sex between a man and a woman is unnatural.
So lets make sure all those involved in "unnatural acts" are treated the same. M'kay?
Quite a few animals have non-procreative sex. Bottlenose dolphins, bonobo chimpanzees are two that come instantly to mind.
You are going by reports from professional associations that rich gays paid off decades ago to make ridiculous proclamations, which have been laughed at ever since. You're either part of that scam or a victim of it.The flaw in your argument is your uneducated disdain and fear of homosexuality. Far more learned people than you have thoroughly studied homosexuality and their findings, their peer reviewed reports refute your notions, built no doubt on stereotypes, fear, ignorance and anecdotes.Are the Christians being intolerant of the gays, or are the gays being intolerant of the Christians ? To hear the gays, and their supporters tell it, only the Christians are being intolerant to them. As the Christians say, they aren't being tolerant or intolerant - they are just following their religious rules.
Actually, they are both being intolerant, Perhaps what it really comes down to is who is right to be intolerant to the other, and for whom is it wrong. The gays are demanding that society recognize them as normal, when they are abnormal, sicko, degenerate perverts, who engage in pure looneybird behavior, that's contrary to nature.
The Christians demand that they have the right to choose what to deal with and not deal with, as set up by the religious freedom laws. Looks like an easy choice. The Christians should not only be able to conduct their business their way, without having to participate in crazy homosexual activiites, but those activities themselves ought to be banned, for the betterment of society and to protect children from this lunacy.
Wrong."So Who's Really Being Intolerant ?"
Conservatives, who seek to discriminate against gay patrons for no other reason than who those patrons are, in violation of just, proper, and Constitutional public accommodations laws that in no way 'violate' religious liberty.
Liar.
It has to do with one thing, providing a product that conflicts with one's religious principles.
Why does a homosexual's desire to purchase a product outweigh a person's right to religious freedom?
Answer: it doesn't.
Go find one of 99 bakers who will provide the product you seek and leave the 1 who cannot, be. They will either flourish or wither and die but will do so while still enjoying their religious freedom.
This whole thing is nothing but homosexuals screaming 'you must see me, hear me, approve of me or you are a hater.'
Diversity of thought? Yeah, right.
There's no legitimate reason to discriminate against a gay patron; it's motivated solely by hate.
There was never any doubt of that fact but this photo of the signing ceremony is incontrovertible proof.
Yes...is see you cleaned your green shirt and got a new rainbow arm band....and that is a nice brick in your hand....going out to discuss freedom of religion?
Absolutely not ridiculous. Of course, he's being forced to participate in a homosexual activity (a homosexual wedding), simply because he baked a cake for a gay wedding.Of course it is. The deniars of that are talking ridiculous.
No, not ridiculous at all. These pizza makers, bakers and florists are not being forced to engage in any hoosexual behavior. They are simply being told if they open a business to the public they open it to everyone in the public. They are being paid to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers. That the people eating the cake are gay or straight does not effect their religion at all.
Of course they're being forced to engage in homosexual behavior, by being part of a homosexual wedding. And being told if they open a business to the public, they open it to everyone in the public, is absolutely outrageous and smacks of fascism. Should every owner of a women's shoe store be required to sell men's shoes too ? Should every seller of guitars have to also sell pianos, to satisfy the piano players ? What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,. And it isn't who is eating the cake that is the issue, it is the store workers having to participate in a homosexual activity. Get it ?
" What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,"
The underlined and bold is the bullshit.
They open a business to the public, they are not required to carry everything in stock that is even vaguely related to their shop, as your ridiculous post suggests. But they are required to do business with the public. They cannot discriminate against gays, blacks, jews, muslims, men, women, or any other subgroup that they decide they find unacceptable.
And the store is not participating in homosexual activity. The homosexual activity will take place on the honeymoon. The bakery is simply baking a cake and being paid by homosexuals.
No....the wedding is the activity....and they are protected from participating by the Constitution...regardless of what the Supreme Court says....they also said separate but equal was right as well..........
Yes, the wedding is the activity for which the cake was bought. And the wedding is recognized by the state.
But to claim that the baker is being forced to participate in homosexual activity, simply because he baked a cake for a gay wedding, is absolutely ridiculous.
You are going by reports from professional associations that rich gays paid off decades ago to make ridiculous proclamations, which have been laughed at ever since. You're either part of that scam or a victim of it.The flaw in your argument is your uneducated disdain and fear of homosexuality. Far more learned people than you have thoroughly studied homosexuality and their findings, their peer reviewed reports refute your notions, built no doubt on stereotypes, fear, ignorance and anecdotes.Are the Christians being intolerant of the gays, or are the gays being intolerant of the Christians ? To hear the gays, and their supporters tell it, only the Christians are being intolerant to them. As the Christians say, they aren't being tolerant or intolerant - they are just following their religious rules.
Actually, they are both being intolerant, Perhaps what it really comes down to is who is right to be intolerant to the other, and for whom is it wrong. The gays are demanding that society recognize them as normal, when they are abnormal, sicko, degenerate perverts, who engage in pure looneybird behavior, that's contrary to nature.
The Christians demand that they have the right to choose what to deal with and not deal with, as set up by the religious freedom laws. Looks like an easy choice. The Christians should not only be able to conduct their business their way, without having to participate in crazy homosexual activiites, but those activities themselves ought to be banned, for the betterment of society and to protect children from this lunacy.
Absolutely not ridiculous. Of course, he's being forced to participate in a homosexual activity (a homosexual wedding), simply because he baked a cake for a gay wedding.No, not ridiculous at all. These pizza makers, bakers and florists are not being forced to engage in any hoosexual behavior. They are simply being told if they open a business to the public they open it to everyone in the public. They are being paid to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers. That the people eating the cake are gay or straight does not effect their religion at all.
Of course they're being forced to engage in homosexual behavior, by being part of a homosexual wedding. And being told if they open a business to the public, they open it to everyone in the public, is absolutely outrageous and smacks of fascism. Should every owner of a women's shoe store be required to sell men's shoes too ? Should every seller of guitars have to also sell pianos, to satisfy the piano players ? What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,. And it isn't who is eating the cake that is the issue, it is the store workers having to participate in a homosexual activity. Get it ?
" What they are being paid to do is to make pizza, bakes cakes and arrange flowers, for whom they see fit, within the limitations of their religion, not how some degenerates demand they do it,"
The underlined and bold is the bullshit.
They open a business to the public, they are not required to carry everything in stock that is even vaguely related to their shop, as your ridiculous post suggests. But they are required to do business with the public. They cannot discriminate against gays, blacks, jews, muslims, men, women, or any other subgroup that they decide they find unacceptable.
And the store is not participating in homosexual activity. The homosexual activity will take place on the honeymoon. The bakery is simply baking a cake and being paid by homosexuals.
No....the wedding is the activity....and they are protected from participating by the Constitution...regardless of what the Supreme Court says....they also said separate but equal was right as well..........
Yes, the wedding is the activity for which the cake was bought. And the wedding is recognized by the state.
But to claim that the baker is being forced to participate in homosexual activity, simply because he baked a cake for a gay wedding, is absolutely ridiculous.
When things don't go your way, do you often look for scapegoats and conspiracies?You are going by reports from professional associations that rich gays paid off decades ago to make ridiculous proclamations, which have been laughed at ever since. You're either part of that scam or a victim of it.The flaw in your argument is your uneducated disdain and fear of homosexuality. Far more learned people than you have thoroughly studied homosexuality and their findings, their peer reviewed reports refute your notions, built no doubt on stereotypes, fear, ignorance and anecdotes.Are the Christians being intolerant of the gays, or are the gays being intolerant of the Christians ? To hear the gays, and their supporters tell it, only the Christians are being intolerant to them. As the Christians say, they aren't being tolerant or intolerant - they are just following their religious rules.
Actually, they are both being intolerant, Perhaps what it really comes down to is who is right to be intolerant to the other, and for whom is it wrong. The gays are demanding that society recognize them as normal, when they are abnormal, sicko, degenerate perverts, who engage in pure looneybird behavior, that's contrary to nature.
The Christians demand that they have the right to choose what to deal with and not deal with, as set up by the religious freedom laws. Looks like an easy choice. The Christians should not only be able to conduct their business their way, without having to participate in crazy homosexual activiites, but those activities themselves ought to be banned, for the betterment of society and to protect children from this lunacy.
No, every sexual act not aimed at reproduction is NOT unnatural. If it is between a man and woman with mating body parts, it is natural. Reproduction has nothing to do with it. Who ever said it did ?Every sexual act that is not aimed at reproduction is, therefore, unnatural. Having sex and using birth control is unnatural. Oral sex between a man and a woman is unnatural.
So lets make sure all those involved in "unnatural acts" are treated the same. M'kay?
Forcing them to go against their religious beliefs isn't discriminating them for their beliefs?
How are they being forced to go against their religious beliefs?? Are THEY being forced to engage in homosexual acts? They are making pizzas, arranging flowers or baking cakes. That is all.
No they are being forced to cater to a group that in their belief system is an abomination and they wish not to.
It is an "abomination"?? Really?? And how do they determine this?
Lev. 18:22 for starters.
I'm sorry, but you will have to find new testament references calling it an abomination. Since almost all the rest of Leviticus is routinely ignored.
So you are saying that homosexuals are actually animals, Since animals show homosexual tendencies."Contrary to nature."
Anything exhibited by nature or non-human animals is "natural" yes? So what about the several hundred species of animals exhibiting homosexual behaviours and preferences? Sounds pretty "natural" to me.
Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality Yale Scientific Magazine
When you engage in commerce, you do so voluntarily and are not forced.How are christians being discriminated against? By not allowing them to discriminate? lol
If christians do not want to follow the laws of the land, where dealing with people is concerned, then they should do like the Amish. Otherwise, you follow the basic rules.
Forcing them to go against their religious beliefs isn't discriminating them for their beliefs?
If they cant seperate their religion from doing business, they are free to not engage.
Yes and in a free society you should be free to engage in commerce with whoever you choose. The queers can look for another vendor that caters to their abominable lifestyle.
In a completely free society that would certainly be the case. It would also have allowed businesses to bar blacks from sitting at the lunch counter. It would bar jews from doing business with anyone. It would allow realtors to discriminate against people wanting tobuy a home (that they can afford).
Only if being black or Jewish were an abomination according to their beliefs. But we're not talking about blacks or Jews so please stop with the bullshit.
