STATE COMPARES CHRISTIAN BAKER TO NAZIS

[PaintMyHouse]

Believer forced to celebrate homosexual unions.

State compares Christian baker to Nazis

The Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s order to a baker to use his artistry to celebrate homosexual unions in violation of his Christian beliefs is under challenge, in part, because a commissioner likened Christians to slavers and Nazis.

Freedom of religion is in the heart of an individual.

A church is nothing but a congregation of individuals.

Guess what's next? Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings Page 655 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

More of your "logic" the courts disagree with. I'm thinking it's time for you to think about that...

 

[Silhouette]

Believer forced to celebrate homosexual unions.
State compares Christian baker to Nazis
The Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s order to a baker to use his artistry to celebrate homosexual unions in violation of his Christian beliefs is under challenge, in part, because a commissioner likened Christians to slavers and Nazis.

Freedom of religion is in the heart of an individual.
A church is nothing but a congregation of individuals.
Guess what's next? Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings Page 655 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

There are nazis afoot all right. On the far, far left..

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Is there any doubt that Nazis and Slavers professed to be Christian and used that to justify their actions?

Could be. Now, we have the flip side, do we not? Homosexuals forcing people to follow their beliefs and using law to justify their actions.

Be careful who you "back". They could be the modern day version of slavers and Nazi's.

Mark

Let us know what homosexuals are forcing you to be a homosexual.

They are attempting to use the law to force Christians to partake of their sin by selling them a product that is used in the celebration of a marriage God calls sin. A Christian cannot be a part of that. If homosexuals desire to buy a wedding cake for their weddings they can go to a gay bakery. Leave Christian businesses alone.

I'll tell you what will happen out of this, Bodie. Even though you do not believe it. What they are sowing they are going to reap. Everything they are doing is going to come back to them in judgment and then it will be too late to turn it around. How do I know this? Because the Word of God says that God counts it a righteous thing to send tribulation upon those who trouble his children. Don't want trouble with God? Leave his children alone!

Gay Marriage, more and more, is a legal form of marriage. You don't like certain kinds of marriage? Well duh....don't be in the wedding business.

And what gives the right to tell anyone how to run their business?

Maybe the fact that we paid for and provide what allows them to be in business in the first place my little infant. Pay to play, there is no free lunch.

 

[bripat9643]

Could be. Now, we have the flip side, do we not? Homosexuals forcing people to follow their beliefs and using law to justify their actions.

Be careful who you "back". They could be the modern day version of slavers and Nazi's.

Mark

Let us know what homosexuals are forcing you to be a homosexual.

They are attempting to use the law to force Christians to partake of their sin by selling them a product that is used in the celebration of a marriage God calls sin. A Christian cannot be a part of that. If homosexuals desire to buy a wedding cake for their weddings they can go to a gay bakery. Leave Christian businesses alone.

I'll tell you what will happen out of this, Bodie. Even though you do not believe it. What they are sowing they are going to reap. Everything they are doing is going to come back to them in judgment and then it will be too late to turn it around. How do I know this? Because the Word of God says that God counts it a righteous thing to send tribulation upon those who trouble his children. Don't want trouble with God? Leave his children alone!

Gay Marriage, more and more, is a legal form of marriage. You don't like certain kinds of marriage? Well duh....don't be in the wedding business.

And what gives the right to tell anyone how to run their business?

Maybe the fact that we paid for and provide what allows them to be in business in the first place my little infant. Pay to play, there is no free lunch.

Wrong. That's one of the main things wrong with government provided services, it makes boot-licking goons like you think you have the right to impose your whims on other people. Government provides virtually nothing that allows people to be run a business. They could easily provide those things for themselves if they had to.

BTW, businesses pay for the services they use, not you.

 

[kaz]

When the voters vote for what you want, we are a democracy. When they don't, we aren't.

We are a Democratic Republic. Learn what that is.

And learn why the minority is protected from the whims of the majority. Both are very important concepts here.

That has nothing to do with what I said, and the idea that liberals are protecting anyone from the majority is so naive it's just sad.

You don't live in a Democracy. Does that help?

No, you still can't read

Oh but I can. What part of you don't get a vote do you not understand?

strawman

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Government provides virtually nothing that allows people to be run a business. They could easily provide those things for themselves if they had to.

You couldn't be more wrong but you don't know capitalism so there you go.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

We are a Democratic Republic. Learn what that is.

And learn why the minority is protected from the whims of the majority. Both are very important concepts here.

That has nothing to do with what I said, and the idea that liberals are protecting anyone from the majority is so naive it's just sad.

You don't live in a Democracy. Does that help?

No, you still can't read

Oh but I can. What part of you don't get a vote do you not understand?

strawman

No, it's reality. You don't get a vote and you'll just have to deal with. Your chance comes every other year, in most cases.

 

[kaz]

That has nothing to do with what I said, and the idea that liberals are protecting anyone from the majority is so naive it's just sad.

You don't live in a Democracy. Does that help?

No, you still can't read

Oh but I can. What part of you don't get a vote do you not understand?

strawman

No, it's reality. You don't get a vote and you'll just have to deal with. Your chance comes every other year, in most cases.

You really are illiterate, aren't you? I pointed out your double standard, and you picked one of your own standards and objected to it and keep arguing with me as if that had anything to do with what I said, which was about YOUR double standard. It's a hoot, keep going.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

You don't live in a Democracy. Does that help?

No, you still can't read

Oh but I can. What part of you don't get a vote do you not understand?

strawman

No, it's reality. You don't get a vote and you'll just have to deal with. Your chance comes every other year, in most cases.

You really are illiterate, aren't you? I pointed out your double standard, and you picked one of your own standards and objected to it and keep arguing with me as if that had anything to do with what I said, which was about YOUR double standard. It's a hoot, keep going.

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

 

[bripat9643]

No, you still can't read

Oh but I can. What part of you don't get a vote do you not understand?

strawman

No, it's reality. You don't get a vote and you'll just have to deal with. Your chance comes every other year, in most cases.

You really are illiterate, aren't you? I pointed out your double standard, and you picked one of your own standards and objected to it and keep arguing with me as if that had anything to do with what I said, which was about YOUR double standard. It's a hoot, keep going.

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, it actually is up for a vote. Marriage benefits are a government granted privilege, not a right. Government could end them all tomorrow and it would be perfectly Constitutional.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Oh but I can. What part of you don't get a vote do you not understand?

strawman

No, it's reality. You don't get a vote and you'll just have to deal with. Your chance comes every other year, in most cases.

You really are illiterate, aren't you? I pointed out your double standard, and you picked one of your own standards and objected to it and keep arguing with me as if that had anything to do with what I said, which was about YOUR double standard. It's a hoot, keep going.

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, it actually is up for a vote. Marriage benefits are a government granted privilege, not a right. Government could end them all tomorrow and it would be perfectly Constitutional.

It could but that has nothing to do with the question do the gays an have equal rights to wed, they do, and is that up for a vote, it isn't. Clear?

 

[kaz]

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, since my point was based on that. My point is you pick the one that yields the result you want. When you want vote, you just say the people voted, end of discussion. When the courts rule what you want, you just say the courts ruled, end of discussion. Nothing ever is crap, you wanted the other way, but it's the inapplicable process, so sorry, you lost.

I'll give you some examples for me. I am pro-choice, but the Constitution doesn't address abortion, so it's a State power. I oppose the death penalty, but again, the Constitution doesn't address it, so it's a State power. I don't think States should have the power to implement public accommodation laws, but nothing in the Constitution stops them. I actually care about the process, you pick the process that justifies the result you want. You still don't get it, do you? Be honest.

 

[bripat9643]

strawman

No, it's reality. You don't get a vote and you'll just have to deal with. Your chance comes every other year, in most cases.

You really are illiterate, aren't you? I pointed out your double standard, and you picked one of your own standards and objected to it and keep arguing with me as if that had anything to do with what I said, which was about YOUR double standard. It's a hoot, keep going.

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, it actually is up for a vote. Marriage benefits are a government granted privilege, not a right. Government could end them all tomorrow and it would be perfectly Constitutional.

It could but that has nothing to do with the question do the gays an have equal rights to wed, they do, and is that up for a vote, it isn't. Clear?

No they don't. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. The term "gay marriage" is an oxymoron. It serves no social purpose. It's a joke.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

No, it's reality. You don't get a vote and you'll just have to deal with. Your chance comes every other year, in most cases.

You really are illiterate, aren't you? I pointed out your double standard, and you picked one of your own standards and objected to it and keep arguing with me as if that had anything to do with what I said, which was about YOUR double standard. It's a hoot, keep going.

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, it actually is up for a vote. Marriage benefits are a government granted privilege, not a right. Government could end them all tomorrow and it would be perfectly Constitutional.

It could but that has nothing to do with the question do the gays an have equal rights to wed, they do, and is that up for a vote, it isn't. Clear?

No they don't. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. The term "gay marriage" is an oxymoron. It serves no social purpose. It's a joke.

Give it up my little infant. It's over and done with, and you lost.

 

[bripat9643]

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, since my point was based on that. My point is you pick the one that yields the result you want. When you want vote, you just say the people voted, end of discussion. When the courts rule what you want, you just say the courts ruled, end of discussion. Nothing ever is crap, you wanted the other way, but it's the inapplicable process, so sorry, you lost.

I'll give you some examples for me. I am pro-choice, but the Constitution doesn't address abortion, so it's a State power. I oppose the death penalty, but again, the Constitution doesn't address it, so it's a State power. I don't think States should have the power to implement public accommodation laws, but nothing in the Constitution stops them. I actually care about the process, you pick the process that justifies the result you want. You still don't get it, do you? Be honest.

Since nothing in the Constitution grants the federal government the authority to tell hotels how to run their business, it doesn't have any such power.

 

[bripat9643]

You really are illiterate, aren't you? I pointed out your double standard, and you picked one of your own standards and objected to it and keep arguing with me as if that had anything to do with what I said, which was about YOUR double standard. It's a hoot, keep going.

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, it actually is up for a vote. Marriage benefits are a government granted privilege, not a right. Government could end them all tomorrow and it would be perfectly Constitutional.

It could but that has nothing to do with the question do the gays an have equal rights to wed, they do, and is that up for a vote, it isn't. Clear?

No they don't. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. The term "gay marriage" is an oxymoron. It serves no social purpose. It's a joke.

Give it up my little infant. It's over and done with, and you lost.

The legal fight may be over in the short run, but that doesn't make it right. When the U.S. breaks up all the individual parts will decide for themselves whether gays have a legal right to marry.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, since my point was based on that. My point is you pick the one that yields the result you want. When you want vote, you just say the people voted, end of discussion. When the courts rule what you want, you just say the courts ruled, end of discussion. Nothing ever is crap, you wanted the other way, but it's the inapplicable process, so sorry, you lost.

I'll give you some examples for me. I am pro-choice, but the Constitution doesn't address abortion, so it's a State power. I oppose the death penalty, but again, the Constitution doesn't address it, so it's a State power. I don't think States should have the power to implement public accommodation laws, but nothing in the Constitution stops them. I actually care about the process, you pick the process that justifies the result you want. You still don't get it, do you? Be honest.

I deal with the reality. If you can get a law passed, no matter what it is, and the courts uphold it then that's where it is. If you pass a law that you aren't allowed to pass, and the courts kill it then that's the end of that. I don't change the rules as I go along. When I tell you we aren't a Democracy that doesn't change just because I liked the outcome of the vote. The vote for gay marriage matters no more than the vote against. It's not up for a vote, period.

 

[Skylar]

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, since my point was based on that. My point is you pick the one that yields the result you want. When you want vote, you just say the people voted, end of discussion. When the courts rule what you want, you just say the courts ruled, end of discussion. Nothing ever is crap, you wanted the other way, but it's the inapplicable process, so sorry, you lost.

I'll give you some examples for me. I am pro-choice, but the Constitution doesn't address abortion, so it's a State power. I oppose the death penalty, but again, the Constitution doesn't address it, so it's a State power. I don't think States should have the power to implement public accommodation laws, but nothing in the Constitution stops them. I actually care about the process, you pick the process that justifies the result you want. You still don't get it, do you? Be honest.

Since nothing in the Constitution grants the federal government the authority to tell hotels how to run their business, it doesn't have any such power.

These are state laws. And the constitution doesn't define state power. It defines federal power

 

[PaintMyHouse]

There is no double standard. There are things you get to vote on, things the people you elect get to vote, and things neither one of you do. Gay marriage isn't up for a vote so it's in that last category. Clear now?

Yes, since my point was based on that. My point is you pick the one that yields the result you want. When you want vote, you just say the people voted, end of discussion. When the courts rule what you want, you just say the courts ruled, end of discussion. Nothing ever is crap, you wanted the other way, but it's the inapplicable process, so sorry, you lost.

I'll give you some examples for me. I am pro-choice, but the Constitution doesn't address abortion, so it's a State power. I oppose the death penalty, but again, the Constitution doesn't address it, so it's a State power. I don't think States should have the power to implement public accommodation laws, but nothing in the Constitution stops them. I actually care about the process, you pick the process that justifies the result you want. You still don't get it, do you? Be honest.

Since nothing in the Constitution grants the federal government the authority to tell hotels how to run their business, it doesn't have any such power.

The courts disagree. See Heart of Atlanta Motel v US. You lose, yet again.

 

[Skylar]

Believer forced to celebrate homosexual unions.
State compares Christian baker to Nazis
The Colorado Civil Rights Commission’s order to a baker to use his artistry to celebrate homosexual unions in violation of his Christian beliefs is under challenge, in part, because a commissioner likened Christians to slavers and Nazis.

Freedom of religion is in the heart of an individual.
A church is nothing but a congregation of individuals.
Guess what's next? Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings Page 655 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

There are nazis afoot all right. On the far, far left..

A church is a physical location, a place of worship, a structure. You don't hold weddings in your heart, Silo. Its too small, and the bride would get blood all over her dress.