What's Christian About Denying Service To Any Individual?

[Quantum Windbag]

Every wedding cake is decorated differently. No two wedding cakes are the same, otherwise bakers would not offer different cake designs.

Which is why wedding cakes are protected speech under the 1st Amendment, and thus exempt from your attempts to tell the people that bake them what they have to say, just like you cannot tell a anchorman what to say about a politician. That, by the way, is why Citizens United was decided the way it was.

And being Gay and being Black are immutable characteristics. As you are born Black, you are born Gay.

There is absolutely zero evidence that being gay is an immutable characteristic. In fact,t here are actual studies that support the theory that it is a choice, just like your religious beliefs are. If you prefer to pretend that your personal beliefs trump the scientific evidence that disproves them, then you are no different than Ken Ham and Micheal Phelps.

In other words, you are close minded religious bigot.

 

[Nosmo King]

Baking a wedding cake for a heterosexual wedding or a homosexual wedding involves the exact same things, namely BAKING, DECORATING, AND DELIVERING A CAKE. The baker doesn't make judgments on the heterosexual couple, why should he make judgments on the homosexual couple? He's a baker, not a social arbiter. Denying his services to Gays is no different than denying Blacks service at a lunch counter.

Bakers are robots?

What a weird conclusion to draw!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Opinion? I share this factual knowledge with the American Psychiatric Association and people who are born homosexual. Do you think homosexuality is a choice? What evidence can you bring to support that?

If it is factual knowledge you should be able to demonstrate why people who have openly said that being gay is a choice are lying sacks of shit by citing actual peer reviewed studies that prove that it is genetic. You should also be able to explain, again using actual peer reviewed studies, why pedophilia, bestiality, sadism, and masochism are all mental disorders that can be cured even though they, like homosexuality, are an expression of human sexuality. (Before you get all whacky on me, I am not saying that homosexuals are pedophiles, I am saying that the APA is contradicting itself.)

If, on the other hand, it is merely the opinion of a bunch of whackadoodles who use it to milk money form idiots, I should be able to provide scientific evidence that everything they say is wrong. For the record, I have proven every single claim made by any psychologist that believes that claptrap is wrong, and am more than willing to do it again. Feel free to start a thread challenging me to prove the APA is full of shit, I would love to rub your nose in your ignorance.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Whenever science shows Conservatives that their way of thinking is obsolete, the Conservative never listens, considers and adapts. They simply dismiss the science. It always works that way. Science shows that mankind was not put on earth fully formed like a potted geranium, Conservatives call the science bunk. Science shows that burning carbon damages the atmosphere, Conservatives call the science bunk because the overlord of the Conservative (corporations) don't want to change their business practices. Science shows how building materials like asbestos and lead kill people, Conservatives claim the government is interfering with their rights. Rights to do what? Continue to be negligent because doing the right thing would cost too much?

I'm never surprised when science shows the truth and Conservatives ignore it and refuse to believe it.

Science cannot show that a way of thinking is obsolete unless it first demonstrates that no one thinks that way. The reason I know that is that I understand science, the reason you don't is that you think reporters understand science.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why, who wouldn't willingly choose a lifestyle where one is derided and discriminated against by half the people in the country, or to live in a closet and spend one's life scared to death that their secret will not get out to their friends and family? Who would not choose to be mocked throughout their lifetime and judged by half of the country to be a perverse and degenerative human being? Of COURSE they willingly choose to be gay, kind of like those people who find a way to lose their legs or otherwise disable themselves in order to get a "Disable Parking" placard...

If you are right that no one would ever chose to be mocked, then no one from Oklahoma would ever visit New York. I can provide hundreds of examples of lifestyles that are open to mocking, unless you can explain how all of them are the result of genetics, or whatever it is that you think tells people how to behave, you just look like an idiot. The fact that you are incapable of explaining something does not make it false. That only works for religious nuts.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Science certainly has proved that skin color is genetic.
It hasn't proved that sexual orientation is genetic.

Bring your evidence if you want to equate the two of them.

Many immutable characteristics are not limited to genetics. Emotional and psychiatric aspects are not necessarily linked to genes. You cannot rely entirely on one factor like genetics to precisely ascertain characteristics.

The entire field of psychiatry is founded on the premise that people can change their emotional and psychiatric aspects. hat makes them by definition, mutable. Want to try again?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And I am never surprised that libs think every word that comes out of their mouth is "science". When I have 15 posts I will post a link for you.

I'm not spouting science. I'm pointing out what I perceive as an innate fear and suspicion of science whenever it refutes backward Conservative ideas.

He did not say you were spouting science, he said you are spouting nonsense and calling it science.

 

[Chuckt]

Nosmo,

It is unfair to criticize the Christian right for deriding scientific thought. A couple of decades ago, the church admitted that Galileo was right about the earth circling the sun....

Please Google the myth of the church and Galileo.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If the Right can not understand how the annual release of 5,000 million metric tons of greenhouse gases causes global warming, I do not expect them to believe the 1993 scientific discovery that gays have a genetic predisposition toward homosexuality. This, of course, is easy enough to Google, but it makes no difference because whenever the Right disagrees with scientific conclusions or research, the Right decides that all the scientists are actually Harvard liberals who are secretly working for Al Gore and the New World Order.

If you cannot understand facts I cannot expect you to understand that the 1993 discovery was never duplicated by anyone, which pretty much proves it didn't happen.

Skin color and other genetic traits can be traced through inheritance patterns and simple Mendelian genetics. Homosexuals are identified not by a trait or a gene, but rather by their actions. Without the action, they would be indistinguishable from all other people. It is only when they alter their behavior that they become a group that is recognized as being different. If we were to assume momentarily that homosexuality was genetic, then the most one could conclude is that those individuals were not morally responsible for being homosexual. However, that does not mean that they are not morally responsible for homosexual actions! Merely having the gene would not force one to carry out the behavior. For instance, if scientists were able to document that a “rape gene” existed, we certainly would not blame an individual for possessing this gene, but neither would we allow him to act upon that rape disposition. Neil Risch and his coworkers admitted:

There is little disagreement that male homosexual orientation is not a Mendelian trait. In fact, a priori, one would expect the role of a major gene in male homosexual orientation to be limited because of the strong selective pressures against such a gene. It is unlikely that a major gene underlying such a common trait could persist over time without an extraordinary counterbalancing mechanism (1993, 262:2064).​

Evan S. Balaban, a neurobiologist at the Neurosciences Institute in San Diego, noted that

the search for the biological underpinnings of complex human traits has a sorry history of late. In recent years, researchers and the media have proclaimed the “discovery” of genes linked to alcoholism and mental illness as well as to homosexuality. None of the claims...has been confirmed (as quoted in Horgan, 1995).​

Charles Mann agreed, stating: “Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated” (1994, 264:1687). It appears that the gay gene will be added to this category of unreplicated claims.
The real issue here is homosexual actions that society has deemed immoral and, in many instances, illegal. Since no study has firmly established an underlying genetic cause for homosexuality, arguments suggesting “equal rights” are both baseless and illogical.

Science vs. the "Gay Gene"

Defend homosexual rights on the basis of the simple fact that everyone has a right to do whatever the fuck they want as long as they are violating anyone else's rights, not on the basis that some idiot said something that has been proven wrong.

For the record, I have always upheld the first, which is why I support the right of people to make their own choices about who they do business with.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Some theorists have been looking for string theory to replace the current theories which would mean the theories we hold today are wrong.

Hey, we got by with Newton and Einstein for a long time.

We still get by with them and probably will after we figure out quantum mechanics. It is just easier to use Newtonian physics for anything inside an inertial frame.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Baking a wedding cake for a heterosexual wedding or a homosexual wedding involves the exact same things, namely BAKING, DECORATING, AND DELIVERING A CAKE. The baker doesn't make judgments on the heterosexual couple, why should he make judgments on the homosexual couple? He's a baker, not a social arbiter. Denying his services to Gays is no different than denying Blacks service at a lunch counter.

Bakers are robots?

What a weird conclusion to draw!

Why?

You claimed they don't make judgements. Since every human being makes judgements, that must make bakers not human.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Nosmo,

It is unfair to criticize the Christian right for deriding scientific thought. A couple of decades ago, the church admitted that Galileo was right about the earth circling the sun....

Please Google the myth of the church and Galileo.

I have explained to them, multiple times, that it was the scientists that had a problem with Galileo, and they used the Church to attack him because the Church was the only political entity powerful enough to shut him up, but they insist that proves the attack was based on religion.

 

[Vandalshandle]

I thought it might be something like that. What a refreshingly honest statement coming from an atheist.

Libs are always claiming "Science says thus and so" but never get it through their heads that science is only fact until the next thing comes along.

Some theorists have been looking for string theory to replace the current theories which would mean the theories we hold today are wrong.

Ok, I get it. Scientists are proving that science is wrong.....

That being the case, one must rely instead on scrolls written by unknown people thousands of years ago.

 

[Chuckt]

Some theorists have been looking for string theory to replace the current theories which would mean the theories we hold today are wrong.

Ok, I get it. Scientists are proving that science is wrong.....

That being the case, one must rely instead on scrolls written by unknown people thousands of years ago, instead.

These aren't the ones I would bring up but get in line:

Superseded scientific theories - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Vandalshandle]

I can prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the studies by theorists proving that scientists are wrong are even wronger!

 

[Chuckt]

I can prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the studies by theorists proving that scientists are wrong are even wronger!

I have a textbook from college that proves they were wrong.

 

[Clement]

I can prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the studies by theorists proving that scientists are wrong are even wronger!

The theorists proving scientists wrong are other scientists.

You don't get out much, do you?

 

[Infidel]

What's Christian About Denying Service To Any Individual?

Didn't jesus hate fags?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I can prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the studies by theorists proving that scientists are wrong are even wronger!

So the studies that proved all the scientists that scoffed at Louis Pasteur were wrong are even wronger than those scientists?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I can prove, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the studies by theorists proving that scientists are wrong are even wronger!

The theorists proving scientists wrong are other scientists.

You don't get out much, do you?

...and sarcasm flies right over your head, doesn't it!

Clement, you are more fun than arguing with a room full of 19 year old Mormon "elder"missionaries!