What's Christian About Denying Service To Any Individual?

[Newby]

The new age of Christianity is to ignore the edicts of Jesus Christ.

This coming from an atheist? What would you know about it? Who are you to judge when someone is following His 'edicts' or not? You're actually worse than any Christian passing judgment that I've seen. Outside of one or two posters on here, you atheists are far worse at being judgmental than anyone I've ever seen. You've certainly opened my eyes Nosmo, I thought you were a nice person from conversations we've had in the coffee shop, had I known how hateful you really are outside of there, I wouldn't have wasted my time talking to you in there. Part of the reason why I don't frequent in there anymore, people are just two faced, friendly and nice in there and hateful out here. Sad.

Calling out folks who seek to hide behind a religion based on tolerance to foment intolerance is not hateful, it's pointing out hypocrisy and heresy. By the way, I am a Christian. A Christian who believes what Jesus taught us, to love one another and to cast the first stone only if we are without sin.

Jesus taught a lot of things, not just the things that you cherry pick to try to rationalize your viewpoint. And if you are a christian as you say, then hypocrisy is running rampant from your mouth, you're one of the most judgmental people on this thread. You're standing on your pedistal looking down on other christians that you don't agree with, talking about casting stones, when you're throwing them one after another from your self appointed lofty position.

 

[Newby]

The new age of Christianity is to ignore the edicts of Jesus Christ.

This coming from an atheist? What would you know about it? Who are you to judge when someone is following His 'edicts' or not? You're actually worse than any Christian passing judgment that I've seen. Outside of one or two posters on here, you atheists are far worse at being judgmental than anyone I've ever seen. You've certainly opened my eyes Nosmo, I thought you were a nice person from conversations we've had in the coffee shop, had I known how hateful you really are outside of there, I wouldn't have wasted my time talking to you in there. Part of the reason why I don't frequent in there anymore, people are just two faced, friendly and nice in there and hateful out here. Sad.

Calling out folks who seek to hide behind a religion based on tolerance to foment intolerance is not hateful, it's pointing out hypocrisy and heresy. By the way, I am a Christian. A Christian who believes what Jesus taught us, to love one another and to cast the first stone only if we are without sin.

So, since you're a christian, you believe that Jesus would want you to participate in something that is sinful? Or is your stance that gay marriage isn't sinful?

 

[paperview]

Lies is all they have, they lie about practically everything.

That's pretty funny coming from someone who lied about me on this very thread -- then didn't have the nads to own up to the fact she got me mixed up with someone else.

I said I attributed the remark to the wrong person when I repsonded about it, an honest mistake, but if you need to dwell on it to make a point, then don't let me interupt.

Yeah, your idea of saying you got the wrong person was saying

"Yes, your buddy mertex jumped in to answer for you...Point stands."

http://www.usmessageboard.com/8725710-post474.html

That's really admitting you made "an honest mistake."

You right there said someone answered for me -- as if...

GMAFB

Nothing could be further than the truth, and your dishonesty is revealed.

 

[Nosmo King]

This coming from an atheist? What would you know about it? Who are you to judge when someone is following His 'edicts' or not? You're actually worse than any Christian passing judgment that I've seen. Outside of one or two posters on here, you atheists are far worse at being judgmental than anyone I've ever seen. You've certainly opened my eyes Nosmo, I thought you were a nice person from conversations we've had in the coffee shop, had I known how hateful you really are outside of there, I wouldn't have wasted my time talking to you in there. Part of the reason why I don't frequent in there anymore, people are just two faced, friendly and nice in there and hateful out here. Sad.

Calling out folks who seek to hide behind a religion based on tolerance to foment intolerance is not hateful, it's pointing out hypocrisy and heresy. By the way, I am a Christian. A Christian who believes what Jesus taught us, to love one another and to cast the first stone only if we are without sin.

So, since you're a christian, you believe that Jesus would want you to participate in something that is sinful? Or is your stance that gay marriage isn't sinful?

Vendors providing services are not participants. Jesus dealt with sinners every day. Some of Jesus' best friends were sinners. Jesus saved sinners. So, yes I believe that Jesus would not have the problem so called Christians have with homosexuals.

Let me ask you a question. What's the difference between bigoted vendors refusing services to a homosexual and Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church?

 

[Chuckt]

The new age of Christianity is to ignore the edicts of Jesus Christ.

Being an atheist you probably didn't notice that not a single Christian is currently in this thread arguing for the idea anyone can tell anyone else what their religion is, not even the one that started this thread. The reason for that is pretty simple, I proved everyone that tried to actually use the Bible to force others to comply with their opinion is wrong. That leaves you no argument on those grounds, even if you are so fucking stupid you can't figure it out.

A couple of points you either over looked or failed to recognize:

1) I am a Christian

2) Jesus preached that we should not judge others, that we should do unto others as we would have others do unto us and , those without sin should cast the first stone.

Those are the basic tenets of the faith. The so-called Christians who are seeking legal cover to foment division, hatred, fear and suspicion of others are blatantly ignoring those basic tenets.

1) I can judge you and I can back it up with doctrine.
2) I don't believe you.

 

[Nosmo King]

Being an atheist you probably didn't notice that not a single Christian is currently in this thread arguing for the idea anyone can tell anyone else what their religion is, not even the one that started this thread. The reason for that is pretty simple, I proved everyone that tried to actually use the Bible to force others to comply with their opinion is wrong. That leaves you no argument on those grounds, even if you are so fucking stupid you can't figure it out.

A couple of points you either over looked or failed to recognize:

1) I am a Christian

2) Jesus preached that we should not judge others, that we should do unto others as we would have others do unto us and , those without sin should cast the first stone.

Those are the basic tenets of the faith. The so-called Christians who are seeking legal cover to foment division, hatred, fear and suspicion of others are blatantly ignoring those basic tenets.

1) I can judge you and I can back it up with doctrine.
2) I don't believe you.

That's so sweet of you! Slave holders backed up their cruelty with doctrine. Old South Jim Crow bigots backed up their cruelty with doctrine. The Scriptures can be interpreted by villains to justify cruelty. The precedent has been set. If you seek cover for hatred amid the Scriptures, know this, you are not the first, nor regrettably the last hater to seek solace in a book dedicated to love.

 

[Newby]

Calling out folks who seek to hide behind a religion based on tolerance to foment intolerance is not hateful, it's pointing out hypocrisy and heresy. By the way, I am a Christian. A Christian who believes what Jesus taught us, to love one another and to cast the first stone only if we are without sin.

So, since you're a christian, you believe that Jesus would want you to participate in something that is sinful? Or is your stance that gay marriage isn't sinful?

Vendors providing services are not participants. Jesus dealt with sinners every day. Some of Jesus' best friends were sinners. Jesus saved sinners. So, yes I believe that Jesus would not have the problem so called Christians have with homosexuals.

Let me ask you a question. What's the difference between bigoted vendors refusing services to a homosexual and Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church?

What I bolded is your opinion, someone else may feel as though they are a participant and may not want to take part in it in any way at all, and that should be their choice. You never answered my question, is a gay marriage sinful according to what Jesus taught? If Jesus thought homosexual behavior was sinful, He would forgive them, i.e. 'save' them and tell them to turn away from their sin, not embrace it. If you're a christian, you should understand that concept. So for people who believe homosexual behavior is a sin, they're not going to be in favor of promoting it or encouraging it. So, is homosexual behavior a sin in your opinion or not?

Your question is already grounded in your own bigotry by you using the term 'bigot' in your question. The party in question only refused the service of a gay wedding cake, not service in general from what I understand. They should be able to refuse a cake to celebrate a divorce if they believe that is a sin and don't want to participate in any way in the celebration. Your problem is that you can only look at this issue thru one lense, and it has clouded your judgment. You apply the label of bigotry towards anyone standing on what they see as their religious principles instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt that the only issue they have is not wanting to take what they see as a path away from God. Did it ever occur to you that they truly care about their faith and following what they see as God's will for their lives instead of it being about hate of other people? Take your blinders off.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'm curious. Just exactly what did Jesus say about gays? I've read the Bible three times, cover to cover, including the Old Testament, which is, as far as I am concerned, strictly Jewish doctrine, and I never read anything that Jesus said about homosexuality.

 

[paperview]

A couple of points you either over looked or failed to recognize:

1) I am a Christian

2) Jesus preached that we should not judge others, that we should do unto others as we would have others do unto us and , those without sin should cast the first stone.

Those are the basic tenets of the faith. The so-called Christians who are seeking legal cover to foment division, hatred, fear and suspicion of others are blatantly ignoring those basic tenets.

1) I can judge you and I can back it up with doctrine.
2) I don't believe you.

That's so sweet of you! Slave holders backed up their cruelty with doctrine. Old South Jim Crow bigots backed up their cruelty with doctrine. The Scriptures can be interpreted by villains to justify cruelty. The precedent has been set. If you seek cover for hatred amid the Scriptures, know this, you are not the first, nor regrettably the last hater to seek solace in a book dedicated to love.

Absolute truth.

For generation upon generation, slavery and bigotry was justified on biblical grounds -- and as slavery expanded in the South, the ferver grew even more. Pastors, preachers, men of the cloth, the leaders, spokesmen and elected representatives used scripture to defend and perpetuate some of the vilest of sins. Heck, it was even in their Declarations of Secession.

Peppered throughout the south were tens of thousands of books, pamphlets, newspapers, etc., all sharing the biblical reasons why God allows us to own human beings...

For example:

Title: Defence Of Southern Slavery. Against The Attacks of
Henry Clay And Alex'r. Campbell,
In Which Much Of The False Philanthropy And Mawkish Sentimentalism Of

The Abolitionists Is Met And Refuted. In Which

It Is Moreover Shown That The Association Of The White

And Black Races In The Relation Of Master And Slave

Is The Appointed Order Of God, As Set Forth In

The Bible, And Constitutes The Best Social

Condition Of Both Races, And The Only

True Principle Of Republicanism.

By A Southern Clergyman.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Calling out folks who seek to hide behind a religion based on tolerance to foment intolerance is not hateful, it's pointing out hypocrisy and heresy. By the way, I am a Christian. A Christian who believes what Jesus taught us, to love one another and to cast the first stone only if we are without sin.

So, since you're a christian, you believe that Jesus would want you to participate in something that is sinful? Or is your stance that gay marriage isn't sinful?

Vendors providing services are not participants. Jesus dealt with sinners every day. Some of Jesus' best friends were sinners. Jesus saved sinners. So, yes I believe that Jesus would not have the problem so called Christians have with homosexuals.

Let me ask you a question. What's the difference between bigoted vendors refusing services to a homosexual and Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church?

Phelps doesn't bake worth a crap......

 

[PostmodernProph]

A couple of points you either over looked or failed to recognize:

1) I am a Christian

2) Jesus preached that we should not judge others, that we should do unto others as we would have others do unto us and , those without sin should cast the first stone.

Those are the basic tenets of the faith. The so-called Christians who are seeking legal cover to foment division, hatred, fear and suspicion of others are blatantly ignoring those basic tenets.

1) I can judge you and I can back it up with doctrine.
2) I don't believe you.

That's so sweet of you! Slave holders backed up their cruelty with doctrine. Old South Jim Crow bigots backed up their cruelty with doctrine. The Scriptures can be interpreted by villains to justify cruelty. The precedent has been set. If you seek cover for hatred amid the Scriptures, know this, you are not the first, nor regrettably the last hater to seek solace in a book dedicated to love.

if not approving of gay marriage makes me a slave holder, why the fuck am I still picking my own cotton?......

 

[Bumberclyde]

1) I can judge you and I can back it up with doctrine.
2) I don't believe you.

That's so sweet of you! Slave holders backed up their cruelty with doctrine. Old South Jim Crow bigots backed up their cruelty with doctrine. The Scriptures can be interpreted by villains to justify cruelty. The precedent has been set. If you seek cover for hatred amid the Scriptures, know this, you are not the first, nor regrettably the last hater to seek solace in a book dedicated to love.

if not approving of gay marriage makes me a slave holder, why the fuck am I still picking my own cotton?......

Probably because that's all you're capable of.

 

[Nosmo King]

So, since you're a christian, you believe that Jesus would want you to participate in something that is sinful? Or is your stance that gay marriage isn't sinful?

Vendors providing services are not participants. Jesus dealt with sinners every day. Some of Jesus' best friends were sinners. Jesus saved sinners. So, yes I believe that Jesus would not have the problem so called Christians have with homosexuals.

Let me ask you a question. What's the difference between bigoted vendors refusing services to a homosexual and Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church?

Phelps doesn't bake worth a crap......

So, since you're a christian, you believe that Jesus would want you to participate in something that is sinful? Or is your stance that gay marriage isn't sinful?

Vendors providing services are not participants. Jesus dealt with sinners every day. Some of Jesus' best friends were sinners. Jesus saved sinners. So, yes I believe that Jesus would not have the problem so called Christians have with homosexuals.

Let me ask you a question. What's the difference between bigoted vendors refusing services to a homosexual and Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church?

What I bolded is your opinion, someone else may feel as though they are a participant and may not want to take part in it in any way at all, and that should be their choice. You never answered my question, is a gay marriage sinful according to what Jesus taught? If Jesus thought homosexual behavior was sinful, He would forgive them, i.e. 'save' them and tell them to turn away from their sin, not embrace it. If you're a christian, you should understand that concept. So for people who believe homosexual behavior is a sin, they're not going to be in favor of promoting it or encouraging it. So, is homosexual behavior a sin in your opinion or not?

Your question is already grounded in your own bigotry by you using the term 'bigot' in your question. The party in question only refused the service of a gay wedding cake, not service in general from what I understand. They should be able to refuse a cake to celebrate a divorce if they believe that is a sin and don't want to participate in any way in the celebration. Your problem is that you can only look at this issue thru one lense, and it has clouded your judgment. You apply the label of bigotry towards anyone standing on what they see as their religious principles instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt that the only issue they have is not wanting to take what they see as a path away from God. Did it ever occur to you that they truly care about their faith and following what they see as God's will for their lives instead of it being about hate of other people? Take your blinders off.

The vendors are to provide services, not judgments. Could Woolworth's be Scripturally justified when they refused service to African Americans? Can Fred Phelps be doctrinally justified when he protests funerals with signs that say "God Hates Fags"? Are wedding vendors required to approve of each and every couple they serve? Is it ethically right to deny services normally provided to heterosexual couples, no matter how much a vendor might personally disapprove of their marriage, and still deny THE EXACT SAME SERVICES to homosexual couples? Is it right to justify that disapproval through the same Scriptural rationalization as Fred Phelps does? Would you see the actions of Phelps as Christian virtues? What is the difference between the judgments Phelps makes and his rationalization as the judgments and rationalizations of vendors refusing gays?

 

[Newby]

Vendors providing services are not participants. Jesus dealt with sinners every day. Some of Jesus' best friends were sinners. Jesus saved sinners. So, yes I believe that Jesus would not have the problem so called Christians have with homosexuals.

Let me ask you a question. What's the difference between bigoted vendors refusing services to a homosexual and Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church?

Phelps doesn't bake worth a crap......

Vendors providing services are not participants. Jesus dealt with sinners every day. Some of Jesus' best friends were sinners. Jesus saved sinners. So, yes I believe that Jesus would not have the problem so called Christians have with homosexuals.

Let me ask you a question. What's the difference between bigoted vendors refusing services to a homosexual and Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church?

What I bolded is your opinion, someone else may feel as though they are a participant and may not want to take part in it in any way at all, and that should be their choice. You never answered my question, is a gay marriage sinful according to what Jesus taught? If Jesus thought homosexual behavior was sinful, He would forgive them, i.e. 'save' them and tell them to turn away from their sin, not embrace it. If you're a christian, you should understand that concept. So for people who believe homosexual behavior is a sin, they're not going to be in favor of promoting it or encouraging it. So, is homosexual behavior a sin in your opinion or not?

Your question is already grounded in your own bigotry by you using the term 'bigot' in your question. The party in question only refused the service of a gay wedding cake, not service in general from what I understand. They should be able to refuse a cake to celebrate a divorce if they believe that is a sin and don't want to participate in any way in the celebration. Your problem is that you can only look at this issue thru one lense, and it has clouded your judgment. You apply the label of bigotry towards anyone standing on what they see as their religious principles instead of giving them the benefit of the doubt that the only issue they have is not wanting to take what they see as a path away from God. Did it ever occur to you that they truly care about their faith and following what they see as God's will for their lives instead of it being about hate of other people? Take your blinders off.

The vendors are to provide services, not judgments. Could Woolworth's be Scripturally justified when they refused service to African Americans? Can Fred Phelps be doctrinally justified when he protests funerals with signs that say "God Hates Fags"? Are wedding vendors required to approve of each and every couple they serve? Is it ethically right to deny services normally provided to heterosexual couples, no matter how much a vendor might personally disapprove of their marriage, and still deny THE EXACT SAME SERVICES to homosexual couples? Is it right to justify that disapproval through the same Scriptural rationalization as Fred Phelps does? Would you see the actions of Phelps as Christian virtues? What is the difference between the judgments Phelps makes and his rationalization as the judgments and rationalizations of vendors refusing gays?

The vendors are people with rights of their own, period. None of the scenarios you have provided would cause a Christian to aid in what he or she may perceive as sin. But that concept doesn't seem to make it past your thick skull.

All you do is continue to spout the same bs, and you don't do the courtesy of answering my questions, so this is just a waste of time.

Would Jesus consider homosexual sex and homosexual marriage as sin? It's a yes or no answer.

 

[Newby]

1) I can judge you and I can back it up with doctrine.
2) I don't believe you.

That's so sweet of you! Slave holders backed up their cruelty with doctrine. Old South Jim Crow bigots backed up their cruelty with doctrine. The Scriptures can be interpreted by villains to justify cruelty. The precedent has been set. If you seek cover for hatred amid the Scriptures, know this, you are not the first, nor regrettably the last hater to seek solace in a book dedicated to love.

Absolute truth.

For generation upon generation, slavery and bigotry was justified on biblical grounds -- and as slavery expanded in the South, the ferver grew even more. Pastors, preachers, men of the cloth, the leaders, spokesmen and elected representatives used scripture to defend and perpetuate some of the vilest of sins. Heck, it was even in their Declarations of Secession.

Peppered throughout the south were tens of thousands of books, pamphlets, newspapers, etc., all sharing the biblical reasons why God allows us to own human beings...

For example:

Title: Defence Of Southern Slavery. Against The Attacks of
Henry Clay And Alex'r. Campbell,
In Which Much Of The False Philanthropy And Mawkish Sentimentalism Of

The Abolitionists Is Met And Refuted. In Which

It Is Moreover Shown That The Association Of The White

And Black Races In The Relation Of Master And Slave

Is The Appointed Order Of God, As Set Forth In

The Bible, And Constitutes The Best Social

Condition Of Both Races, And The Only

True Principle Of Republicanism.

By A Southern Clergyman.

I've asked a simple question, according to scripture would Jesus consider homosexual sex a sin? Yes or no.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The new age of Christianity is to ignore the edicts of Jesus Christ.

Being an atheist you probably didn't notice that not a single Christian is currently in this thread arguing for the idea anyone can tell anyone else what their religion is, not even the one that started this thread. The reason for that is pretty simple, I proved everyone that tried to actually use the Bible to force others to comply with their opinion is wrong. That leaves you no argument on those grounds, even if you are so fucking stupid you can't figure it out.

Is that a direct quote from Jesus? But anyways, I'm sure he'd approve. Probably jot that down for future reference.

I am sure he appreciates your support.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is that a direct quote from Jesus? But anyways, I'm sure he'd approve. Probably jot that down for future reference.

What does Jesus have to do with anything QW said? What's funny is your kind thinks they can use Jesus as a some kind of a weapon against Christians, and you're too damn stupid to even understand that it's in an assinine and empty tactic.

We have another Jesus quoting winner!!!!!! I didn't realize his followers would behave in this manner. You must be a faker.

That argument would make more sense if I couldn't provide examples of Jesus berating people. I can even show an example of of him beating the crap out of people.

On the other hand, you do look stupid, s that is a plus.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It was vetoed because people were lying about what the bill was intended to do. Funny thing, you are still lying about it.

Lies is all they have, they lie about practically everything.

That's pretty funny coming from someone who lied about me on this very thread -- then didn't have the nads to own up to the fact she got me mixed up with someone else.

That is really funny considering he did admit he was wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The new age of Christianity is to ignore the edicts of Jesus Christ.

Being an atheist you probably didn't notice that not a single Christian is currently in this thread arguing for the idea anyone can tell anyone else what their religion is, not even the one that started this thread. The reason for that is pretty simple, I proved everyone that tried to actually use the Bible to force others to comply with their opinion is wrong. That leaves you no argument on those grounds, even if you are so fucking stupid you can't figure it out.

A couple of points you either over looked or failed to recognize:

1) I am a Christian

2) Jesus preached that we should not judge others, that we should do unto others as we would have others do unto us and , those without sin should cast the first stone.

Those are the basic tenets of the faith. The so-called Christians who are seeking legal cover to foment division, hatred, fear and suspicion of others are blatantly ignoring those basic tenets.

And that's why I posted:

The new age of Christianity is to ignore the edicts of Jesus Christ.

So if you consider yourself a Christian, why did you judge me as

so fucking stupid

? I suppose that's the action of a so-called Christian in the new age of Christianity. What a pity. Christians used to be nice, respectful people. Now they are more like the Taliban than Christians.

If you are actually a Christian I suggest you go read 1 Corinthians 8 and then explain to me how you have the authority to force other Christians to do something they see as a sin. After you do that you can choose to either come back to this thread and admit you were wrong, or never come back and to pretend that you have a right to force your interpretation on other people.

In other words, I am not the one judging people, you are. I am actually applying the principles of the Bible consistently, allowing both non Christians, and Christians, to live thier lives as they choose.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The new age of Christianity is to ignore the edicts of Jesus Christ.

This coming from an atheist? What would you know about it? Who are you to judge when someone is following His 'edicts' or not? You're actually worse than any Christian passing judgment that I've seen. Outside of one or two posters on here, you atheists are far worse at being judgmental than anyone I've ever seen. You've certainly opened my eyes Nosmo, I thought you were a nice person from conversations we've had in the coffee shop, had I known how hateful you really are outside of there, I wouldn't have wasted my time talking to you in there. Part of the reason why I don't frequent in there anymore, people are just two faced, friendly and nice in there and hateful out here. Sad.

Calling out folks who seek to hide behind a religion based on tolerance to foment intolerance is not hateful, it's pointing out hypocrisy and heresy. By the way, I am a Christian. A Christian who believes what Jesus taught us, to love one another and to cast the first stone only if we are without sin.

Judging people who do not want to attend same sex weddings because you consider yourself to be enlightened and modern is hateful and bigoted. It is also the direct opposite of what the Bible teaches, which makes you wrong, no matter how you spin it.

Also, unlike you, I actually picked a Scripture that is impossible to spin in a way that justifies any other interpretation other that you being wrong.