Why Must We Abandon Our Religious Beliefs to Operate A Business?

[danielpalos]

So your beliefs are none of my business but the beliefs of your customers are your business?

What the fuck do you care if you bake a cake for a killer, a rapist, an adulterer or a gay guy?

The act of baking and selling a cake is not a sin in any religion

Yeah, amazingly enough, this has nothing to do with the customers' beliefs. I realize it's hard for people to believe, but everything is not about them. This is about THE BAKER and HIS beliefs, and only that. He's doing his thing, and in no way trying to change them doing THEIR thing. He just doesn't want to participate in it.

One more time: IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS WHAT OTHER PEOPLE DO OR DON'T CARE ABOUT. You don't get to tell them anything on that subject.

You also don't get to dictate what is and isn't a sin, and what "any religion" does or doesn't teach. You aren't God, you aren't the Pope, you aren't the head of any religious denomination, YOU AREN'T DECIDING. Stop fucking trying to deal yourself in to approving or disapproving other people's beliefs, and telling them whether or not those CAN BE their beliefs based on your opinion.

The First Amendment doesn't exist to protect beliefs you agree with; it exists to protect those you don't agree with. And you're making it painfully, excruciatingly obvious WHY the First Amendment is necessary.

the first amendment has nothing to do with public accommodation laws

The first amendment only mentions the free exercise of religion. Baking a cake is not exercising a religion it is baking a cake to be sold in a business that is government by public accommodation laws.

If the baker believes that all Back people should be served from the back alley entrance and be charged 3 times more for everything he would be just as wrong as the guy claiming that the very act of conducting his business for "certain people" violates his religion

Now show me where in any written religious scripture that says it is a sin to conduct any business with a sinner.

I know there's nothing about baking cakes being a sin written in any scripture

The First Amendment has EVERYTHING to do with public accommodation laws, when you insist that public accommodation laws require people to act against their beliefs and that you have a right to define their beliefs because you personally don't think they should believe something that conflicts with your public accommodation ideas.

Oh my freaking God, what IS it with people and running to the blacks? You know how I can tell an idea is left-think bullshit? Because the triumphant "Aha!" argument will always involve using black people as human shields.

Understand the difference between believing "This is bad behavior" versus "Therefore, the government must force people to behave otherwise." SOME bad behavior, like killing people or robbing them, needs to be stopped by the government. Other behavior, like racism, not so much, at least not in this day and age. So no, your "Aha!" moment of being supremely convinced that I'm ALL in favor of the government forcing racists to serve black people has fallen flat. I would much prefer that they be openly repugnant in their racism, so that I and virtually everyone else in the country can avoid giving them our money. I have no desire to be funding people who secretly hold such nasty views because the government forces them to pretend otherwise.

I don't have to "show you where" anything. I'm not trying to convert you, or convince you to agree on the subject of sin, and for me to try to "prove" to you that it's a sin would invalidate my entire argument, which is that IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS. Asking me to justify the baker's beliefs to support the argument that you're not entitled to a justification is nonsensical.

I don't give a shit what you "know" or don't "know" about the Scripture, because again, YOU DON'T GET A VOTE. PLEASE stop wasting my time with your constant "Yes, but his beliefs are wrong" posts. They are empty air, because AT NO POINT IN TIME has this ever been about whether or his beliefs can be proven "right" to other people's standards; it's about the fact that HE HAS A RIGHT TO BELIEVE THEM WHETHER YOU AGREE OR NOT. The fact that people DON'T agree on beliefs is exactly why they're protected.

So please, when you start firing out your next post, just save us all some time like this (the parts in all caps should be shouted loudly:

"It's not a sin . . ."
NONE OF MY BUSINESS!
"The scriptures don't say . . ."
NONE OF MY BUSINESS!
"Show me where . . ."
NONE OF MY BUSINESS!
"No religion says . . ."
NONE OF MY BUSINESS!

Because the only answer you are EVER going to get to your attempts to debate whether or not the baker SHOULD believe something is exactly that: NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!

The customer also has a First Amendment. Why do you think we even have public accommodation laws?

Public accommodation laws are still subject to the Constitution.

customers also have a First Amendment, not just bakers.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Oh, so something has to be proven in order to exist, does it?

I've worked with enough kids, I've seen enough people struggling with their sexuality to know you're talking a load of bull.

Well, that's nice, but it won't work when talking about Constitutional rights. Next time you see someone struggling with their sexual identity, tell them to pull the pants down and look in a mirror or make an appointment with a shrink.

You seem to have that typical attitude of "you must be normal or else you don't get rights".

The problem is that you're still talking crap.

You make stuff up, and then pretend it's real so that you can then go after it. It's boring, and it doesn't solve any problems.

Gay people don't stop being gay simply because you don't like it.

Queers don't have a special right to deny Christians their rights or force Christians to submit and violate their beliefs. Grow up.

Ah, insulting words.

"Queer" isn't an insulting word. Homosexuals use "LGBTQ" so it's perfectly fine.

I COULD NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK. IF YOU USE INSULTS I WILL PUT YOU ON IGNORE.

It's not that fucking hard to understand, is it?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Are they forcing them to violate their belief?

No. They have CHOSEN to accept the rules that all businesses in a particular area must adhere to.

In terms of Pennsylvania there are accommodation laws going back to the 1950s (if I remember correctly) that prevent businesses from discriminating based on how you were born.

Also, they could run a business but keep the clientele exclusive, there's nothing against this.

What they can't do is open a shop to ALL THE PUBLIC and discriminate against part of the public based on how they were born.

That's their choice.

Homosexuality is chosen behavior. It hasn't been proven to be a condition of birth.

If homosexuality is a chosen behavior, so is heterosexuality....when did you choose?

Heterosexuality is natural, that means "by nature". Homosexuality is perversion because it isn't natural. The anus isn't a sex organ, dum dum.

Cars aren't natural. Those who drive them aren't doing a natural thing. Therefore driving a care is perversion and all those who drive cars should be prevented from buying wedding cakes.

Being disabled isn't natural. I mean, if homosexuality isn't natural even when kids are born with it, then being disabled isn't either, and they too deserve to be stoned to death just like gay people, right?

Your argument is full of holes.

Something within humans makes them attracted to the opposite sex. What is it? What makes a man attracted to a woman? Genes? Whatever it is, it can go wrong.

A person can be born with no legs. According to you it's not natural. But it happened NATURALLY. Sometimes changes are made in the development process that switch things.

Women have vaginas. Men have penises. That's natural. But then some people are born with both. We know this. So why can't people be born with both sexual attraction to men and sexual attraction to women? We call one Hermaphrodite and the other bi-sexual.

Are you saying hermaphrodites aren't natural?

You obviously haven't a clue to the definition of "nature".

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

 

[BS Filter]

Well, that's nice, but it won't work when talking about Constitutional rights. Next time you see someone struggling with their sexual identity, tell them to pull the pants down and look in a mirror or make an appointment with a shrink.

You seem to have that typical attitude of "you must be normal or else you don't get rights".

The problem is that you're still talking crap.

You make stuff up, and then pretend it's real so that you can then go after it. It's boring, and it doesn't solve any problems.

Gay people don't stop being gay simply because you don't like it.

Queers don't have a special right to deny Christians their rights or force Christians to submit and violate their beliefs. Grow up.

Ah, insulting words.

"Queer" isn't an insulting word. Homosexuals use "LGBTQ" so it's perfectly fine.

I COULD NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK. IF YOU USE INSULTS I WILL PUT YOU ON IGNORE.

It's not that fucking hard to understand, is it?

Go ahead and put me on ignore. The word "queer" can't be an insult because too many homosexuals use the word. If they can use it, so can I.

 

[BS Filter]

Homosexuality is chosen behavior. It hasn't been proven to be a condition of birth.

If homosexuality is a chosen behavior, so is heterosexuality....when did you choose?

Heterosexuality is natural, that means "by nature". Homosexuality is perversion because it isn't natural. The anus isn't a sex organ, dum dum.

Cars aren't natural. Those who drive them aren't doing a natural thing. Therefore driving a care is perversion and all those who drive cars should be prevented from buying wedding cakes.

Being disabled isn't natural. I mean, if homosexuality isn't natural even when kids are born with it, then being disabled isn't either, and they too deserve to be stoned to death just like gay people, right?

Your argument is full of holes.

Something within humans makes them attracted to the opposite sex. What is it? What makes a man attracted to a woman? Genes? Whatever it is, it can go wrong.

A person can be born with no legs. According to you it's not natural. But it happened NATURALLY. Sometimes changes are made in the development process that switch things.

Women have vaginas. Men have penises. That's natural. But then some people are born with both. We know this. So why can't people be born with both sexual attraction to men and sexual attraction to women? We call one Hermaphrodite and the other bi-sexual.

Are you saying hermaphrodites aren't natural?

You obviously haven't a clue to the definition of "nature".

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

Nope, they're not natural.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If homosexuality is a chosen behavior, so is heterosexuality....when did you choose?

Heterosexuality is natural, that means "by nature". Homosexuality is perversion because it isn't natural. The anus isn't a sex organ, dum dum.

Cars aren't natural. Those who drive them aren't doing a natural thing. Therefore driving a care is perversion and all those who drive cars should be prevented from buying wedding cakes.

Being disabled isn't natural. I mean, if homosexuality isn't natural even when kids are born with it, then being disabled isn't either, and they too deserve to be stoned to death just like gay people, right?

Your argument is full of holes.

Something within humans makes them attracted to the opposite sex. What is it? What makes a man attracted to a woman? Genes? Whatever it is, it can go wrong.

A person can be born with no legs. According to you it's not natural. But it happened NATURALLY. Sometimes changes are made in the development process that switch things.

Women have vaginas. Men have penises. That's natural. But then some people are born with both. We know this. So why can't people be born with both sexual attraction to men and sexual attraction to women? We call one Hermaphrodite and the other bi-sexual.

Are you saying hermaphrodites aren't natural?

You obviously haven't a clue to the definition of "nature".

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

 

[frigidweirdo]

You seem to have that typical attitude of "you must be normal or else you don't get rights".

The problem is that you're still talking crap.

You make stuff up, and then pretend it's real so that you can then go after it. It's boring, and it doesn't solve any problems.

Gay people don't stop being gay simply because you don't like it.

Queers don't have a special right to deny Christians their rights or force Christians to submit and violate their beliefs. Grow up.

Ah, insulting words.

"Queer" isn't an insulting word. Homosexuals use "LGBTQ" so it's perfectly fine.

I COULD NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK. IF YOU USE INSULTS I WILL PUT YOU ON IGNORE.

It's not that fucking hard to understand, is it?

Go ahead and put me on ignore. The word "queer" can't be an insult because too many homosexuals use the word. If they can use it, so can I.

It's simple.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Pretty straight-forward. This is a question to anyone who believes that business owners should be forced to abandon their religious beliefs in order to do business. Also, let me preface this by saying that I am non-religious and that, personally, I generally lean pro-choice and pro-gay-rights. This principle is an exception.

Why? Why should business owners be forced to offer certain forms of compensation (birth control, for instance) if the practice of their religion forbids it?

Why should business owners be forced to abandon their moral reservations and do business with people with whom they'd rather not?

The first amendment guarantees the free exercise of religion. Nowhere does it make an exception for the public sector. Nowhere does it say, "Except when doing business".

Nowhere in the bill of rights is the right to demand birth control as compensation from an employer. This is simply a commonly held opinion of leftists.

Nowhere in the bill of rights is the right to demand service of a business owner. Again, simply a commonly held opinion of leftists.

So if the Bill of Rights guarantees religious practice, but nowhere in the founding documents are the rights to demand service or particular forms of compensation, why do both of these things outweigh the right to free exercise?

Particularly, if gay rights activists say that equality of marriage is a right, and rights aren't up for a vote, then why do these same activists believe that the right to the free exercise of religion -can- be infringed when it suits their agenda?

Anyone? Why are your opinion-based rights more valid than the actual legal rights of religious business owners?

We are a nation of laws, the First Amendment states in part:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It is a reach for the government to discriminate against some, who are exercising their right to expression.

No harm is done when a baker makes a cake for a same sex couple, that cannot be said for the couple.

If one accepts the Preamble to our Constitution as both a vision statement, and a mission statement:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

In bold are the words which explain what the Founders believed America should strive for, and discrimination in any form rejects what they hoped to leave our posterity.

 

[BS Filter]

Heterosexuality is natural, that means "by nature". Homosexuality is perversion because it isn't natural. The anus isn't a sex organ, dum dum.

Cars aren't natural. Those who drive them aren't doing a natural thing. Therefore driving a care is perversion and all those who drive cars should be prevented from buying wedding cakes.

Being disabled isn't natural. I mean, if homosexuality isn't natural even when kids are born with it, then being disabled isn't either, and they too deserve to be stoned to death just like gay people, right?

Your argument is full of holes.

Something within humans makes them attracted to the opposite sex. What is it? What makes a man attracted to a woman? Genes? Whatever it is, it can go wrong.

A person can be born with no legs. According to you it's not natural. But it happened NATURALLY. Sometimes changes are made in the development process that switch things.

Women have vaginas. Men have penises. That's natural. But then some people are born with both. We know this. So why can't people be born with both sexual attraction to men and sexual attraction to women? We call one Hermaphrodite and the other bi-sexual.

Are you saying hermaphrodites aren't natural?

You obviously haven't a clue to the definition of "nature".

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Cars aren't natural. Those who drive them aren't doing a natural thing. Therefore driving a care is perversion and all those who drive cars should be prevented from buying wedding cakes.

Being disabled isn't natural. I mean, if homosexuality isn't natural even when kids are born with it, then being disabled isn't either, and they too deserve to be stoned to death just like gay people, right?

Your argument is full of holes.

Something within humans makes them attracted to the opposite sex. What is it? What makes a man attracted to a woman? Genes? Whatever it is, it can go wrong.

A person can be born with no legs. According to you it's not natural. But it happened NATURALLY. Sometimes changes are made in the development process that switch things.

Women have vaginas. Men have penises. That's natural. But then some people are born with both. We know this. So why can't people be born with both sexual attraction to men and sexual attraction to women? We call one Hermaphrodite and the other bi-sexual.

Are you saying hermaphrodites aren't natural?

You obviously haven't a clue to the definition of "nature".

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

 

[BS Filter]

You obviously haven't a clue to the definition of "nature".

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

You didn't make any points. You don't understand why Christians have the belief that homosexuality is an abomination to their God. You don't respect their belief. Until you understand why Christians have the belief and respect their belief, you're not going to understand why Christians refuse to go along with promotion of same-sex marriage.

 

[bodecea]

You seem to have that typical attitude of "you must be normal or else you don't get rights".

The problem is that you're still talking crap.

You make stuff up, and then pretend it's real so that you can then go after it. It's boring, and it doesn't solve any problems.

Gay people don't stop being gay simply because you don't like it.

Queers don't have a special right to deny Christians their rights or force Christians to submit and violate their beliefs. Grow up.

Ah, insulting words.

"Queer" isn't an insulting word. Homosexuals use "LGBTQ" so it's perfectly fine.

I COULD NOT GIVE A FLYING FUCK. IF YOU USE INSULTS I WILL PUT YOU ON IGNORE.

It's not that fucking hard to understand, is it?

Go ahead and put me on ignore. The word "queer" can't be an insult because too many homosexuals use the word. If they can use it, so can I.

Not an insulting word to me....it's the ones who are very insecure in their own sexuality that get on edge.

 

[bodecea]

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

You didn't make any points. You don't understand why Christians have the belief that homosexuality is an abomination to their God. You don't respect their belief. Until you understand why Christians have the belief and respect their belief, you're not going to understand why Christians refuse to go along with promotion of same-sex marriage.

Who cares about their god? Seriously....our country isn't run like a theocracy. We tried that with the Puritans...it was a disaster.

 

[BS Filter]

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

You didn't make any points. You don't understand why Christians have the belief that homosexuality is an abomination to their God. You don't respect their belief. Until you understand why Christians have the belief and respect their belief, you're not going to understand why Christians refuse to go along with promotion of same-sex marriage.

Who cares about their god? Seriously....our country isn't run like a theocracy. We tried that with the Puritans...it was a disaster.

Christians care about their God and the Constitution protects their beliefs. A big problem in this country is the left and queers demand respect, but think they're allowed to disrespect and insult Christians. Doesn't work that way. Instead of passing a law to force Christians to violate their beliefs or be punished, why not live and let live? Go to a business that will accommodate your perversion. Y'all can't do that because live and let live isn't your agenda. Your agenda is submission, and if the Christian will not submit, then they will be destroyed. You're fascists in the truest sense of the word.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Okay, let's find out what you think nature is.

Is a hermaphrodite natural?
Is a disabled person natural?
Is hemophilia natural?
Is cancer natural?

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

You didn't make any points. You don't understand why Christians have the belief that homosexuality is an abomination to their God. You don't respect their belief. Until you understand why Christians have the belief and respect their belief, you're not going to understand why Christians refuse to go along with promotion of same-sex marriage.

I'm supposed to respect their "belief".

Bullshit. Their "belief" if fucking bigotry of the worst kind. They use their religion to justify bigotry.

The simple fact is, they have this book called the Bible which says lots of things, and they cherry pick to their heart's content.

John 8:3-8:11

"3 And the scribes and the Pharisees bring unto him a woman taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst,

4 And said to him: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou?"

Well, you have Moses saying that an adulterer should be stoned to death and you have Jesus not saying she shouldn't be stoned to death.

What Jesus talks about is judging people.

"15 You judge according to the flesh: I judge not any man."

Deuteronomy 21:18-21:21

"21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

Basically talks about stoning a son to death if he doesn't listen to his parents.

Leviticus 20:13

"And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, [and] all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name [of the LORD], shall be put to death."

Blasphemy and you should be stoned to death.

Exodus 31:15

"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."

If you work on the sabbath, you'll be stoned to death.

So, they don't stone gay people to death which is what they're told to do. They don't stone bad sons, they don't stone those who work on the sabbath and they don't stone to death those who blasphemy.

So, they've cherry picked the Bible. They don't follow the parts they find inconvenient.

Mark 12:31

"And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is no other commandment greater than these."

Okay, so you should treat thy neighbor as thyself.

Would you want to be stopped from being able to buy in a shop? No. So you should not stop others.

Again, cherry picking.

So don't come all fucking sanctimonious with me. These people are bigots and they hide behind cherry picked verses of the Bible and nothing more.

 

[otto105]

Pretty straight-forward. This is a question to anyone who believes that business owners should be forced to abandon their religious beliefs in order to do business. Also, let me preface this by saying that I am non-religious and that, personally, I generally lean pro-choice and pro-gay-rights. This principle is an exception.

Why? Why should business owners be forced to offer certain forms of compensation (birth control, for instance) if the practice of their religion forbids it?

Why should business owners be forced to abandon their moral reservations and do business with people with whom they'd rather not?

The first amendment guarantees the free exercise of religion. Nowhere does it make an exception for the public sector. Nowhere does it say, "Except when doing business".

Nowhere in the bill of rights is the right to demand birth control as compensation from an employer. This is simply a commonly held opinion of leftists.

Nowhere in the bill of rights is the right to demand service of a business owner. Again, simply a commonly held opinion of leftists.

So if the Bill of Rights guarantees religious practice, but nowhere in the founding documents are the rights to demand service or particular forms of compensation, why do both of these things outweigh the right to free exercise?

Particularly, if gay rights activists say that equality of marriage is a right, and rights aren't up for a vote, then why do these same activists believe that the right to the free exercise of religion -can- be infringed when it suits their agenda?

Anyone? Why are your opinion-based rights more valid than the actual legal rights of religious business owners?

Your business is either a public accommodation or not. If not, you not a capitalist.

 

[BS Filter]

Nope, they're not natural.

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

You didn't make any points. You don't understand why Christians have the belief that homosexuality is an abomination to their God. You don't respect their belief. Until you understand why Christians have the belief and respect their belief, you're not going to understand why Christians refuse to go along with promotion of same-sex marriage.

I'm supposed to respect their "belief".

Bullshit. Their "belief" if fucking bigotry of the worst kind. They use their religion to justify bigotry.

The simple fact is, they have this book called the Bible which says lots of things, and they cherry pick to their heart's content.

John 8:3-8:11

"3 And the scribes and the Pharisees bring unto him a woman taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst,

4 And said to him: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou?"

Well, you have Moses saying that an adulterer should be stoned to death and you have Jesus not saying she shouldn't be stoned to death.

What Jesus talks about is judging people.

"15 You judge according to the flesh: I judge not any man."

Deuteronomy 21:18-21:21

"21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

Basically talks about stoning a son to death if he doesn't listen to his parents.

Leviticus 20:13

"And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, [and] all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name [of the LORD], shall be put to death."

Blasphemy and you should be stoned to death.

Exodus 31:15

"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."

If you work on the sabbath, you'll be stoned to death.

So, they don't stone gay people to death which is what they're told to do. They don't stone bad sons, they don't stone those who work on the sabbath and they don't stone to death those who blasphemy.

So, they've cherry picked the Bible. They don't follow the parts they find inconvenient.

Mark 12:31

"And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is no other commandment greater than these."

Okay, so you should treat thy neighbor as thyself.

Would you want to be stopped from being able to buy in a shop? No. So you should not stop others.

Again, cherry picking.

So don't come all fucking sanctimonious with me. These people are bigots and they hide behind cherry picked verses of the Bible and nothing more.

You're ignorant of the Scriptures. You're like a little kid playing with a stick of dynamite. You don't rightly divide the Word. You're evil and very stupid. No one refused to sell the queers anything. The Christians refused to submit to what the queers wanted on the cake. You're a liar.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So, if a person with cancer walks into a bakery, it's okay to refuse to serve them because they have cancer?

Also, I'm curious. If they're not natural, then what causes them?

natural | Definition of natural in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

"Existing in or caused by nature; not made or caused by humankind."

Are you saying humankind made cancer? That it didn't exist before we had the ability to make it? Are you saying hemophilia is made by humans, it didn't exist before we figured out how to make it? Are you saying we make hermaphrodites? How? How do we make them?

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

You didn't make any points. You don't understand why Christians have the belief that homosexuality is an abomination to their God. You don't respect their belief. Until you understand why Christians have the belief and respect their belief, you're not going to understand why Christians refuse to go along with promotion of same-sex marriage.

I'm supposed to respect their "belief".

Bullshit. Their "belief" if fucking bigotry of the worst kind. They use their religion to justify bigotry.

The simple fact is, they have this book called the Bible which says lots of things, and they cherry pick to their heart's content.

John 8:3-8:11

"3 And the scribes and the Pharisees bring unto him a woman taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst,

4 And said to him: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou?"

Well, you have Moses saying that an adulterer should be stoned to death and you have Jesus not saying she shouldn't be stoned to death.

What Jesus talks about is judging people.

"15 You judge according to the flesh: I judge not any man."

Deuteronomy 21:18-21:21

"21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

Basically talks about stoning a son to death if he doesn't listen to his parents.

Leviticus 20:13

"And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, [and] all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name [of the LORD], shall be put to death."

Blasphemy and you should be stoned to death.

Exodus 31:15

"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."

If you work on the sabbath, you'll be stoned to death.

So, they don't stone gay people to death which is what they're told to do. They don't stone bad sons, they don't stone those who work on the sabbath and they don't stone to death those who blasphemy.

So, they've cherry picked the Bible. They don't follow the parts they find inconvenient.

Mark 12:31

"And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is no other commandment greater than these."

Okay, so you should treat thy neighbor as thyself.

Would you want to be stopped from being able to buy in a shop? No. So you should not stop others.

Again, cherry picking.

So don't come all fucking sanctimonious with me. These people are bigots and they hide behind cherry picked verses of the Bible and nothing more.

You're ignorant of the Scriptures. You're like a little kid playing with a stick of dynamite. You don't rightly divide the Word. You're evil.

Oh am I really?

Because I don't cherry pick the scriptures in the manner that's convenient for you, I'm ignorant.

Right......

It's funny you know. There are hundreds of Christian Churches out there.

List of Christian denominations - Wikipedia

I can't be bothered to list them all for you, here's the wikipedia page if you really need to know how many there are.

Each one preaches something different. Each one says the Bible means something different.

So, the chances are they're ALL ignorant of the Bible. Or they're all cherry picking their way through.

I've met gay Christians. I've even been to church with gay Christians in THEIR church. This church did not say gay people are bad, or evil, or sinners, or that they should be stoned to death, or that they should be stopped from shopping in stores.

I suppose they're ignorant simply because they don't follow YOUR interpretation (I mean cherry picking really) of the Bible.

 

[BS Filter]

Is anal sex natural?

Well, other animals do it.

So yes.

Are you going to respond to the points I made?

You didn't make any points. You don't understand why Christians have the belief that homosexuality is an abomination to their God. You don't respect their belief. Until you understand why Christians have the belief and respect their belief, you're not going to understand why Christians refuse to go along with promotion of same-sex marriage.

I'm supposed to respect their "belief".

Bullshit. Their "belief" if fucking bigotry of the worst kind. They use their religion to justify bigotry.

The simple fact is, they have this book called the Bible which says lots of things, and they cherry pick to their heart's content.

John 8:3-8:11

"3 And the scribes and the Pharisees bring unto him a woman taken in adultery: and they set her in the midst,

4 And said to him: Master, this woman was even now taken in adultery.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us to stone such a one. But what sayest thou?"

Well, you have Moses saying that an adulterer should be stoned to death and you have Jesus not saying she shouldn't be stoned to death.

What Jesus talks about is judging people.

"15 You judge according to the flesh: I judge not any man."

Deuteronomy 21:18-21:21

"21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

Basically talks about stoning a son to death if he doesn't listen to his parents.

Leviticus 20:13

"And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, [and] all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name [of the LORD], shall be put to death."

Blasphemy and you should be stoned to death.

Exodus 31:15

"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."

If you work on the sabbath, you'll be stoned to death.

So, they don't stone gay people to death which is what they're told to do. They don't stone bad sons, they don't stone those who work on the sabbath and they don't stone to death those who blasphemy.

So, they've cherry picked the Bible. They don't follow the parts they find inconvenient.

Mark 12:31

"And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is no other commandment greater than these."

Okay, so you should treat thy neighbor as thyself.

Would you want to be stopped from being able to buy in a shop? No. So you should not stop others.

Again, cherry picking.

So don't come all fucking sanctimonious with me. These people are bigots and they hide behind cherry picked verses of the Bible and nothing more.

You're ignorant of the Scriptures. You're like a little kid playing with a stick of dynamite. You don't rightly divide the Word. You're evil.

Oh am I really?

Because I don't cherry pick the scriptures in the manner that's convenient for you, I'm ignorant.

Right......

It's funny you know. There are hundreds of Christian Churches out there.

List of Christian denominations - Wikipedia

I can't be bothered to list them all for you, here's the wikipedia page if you really need to know how many there are.

Each one preaches something different. Each one says the Bible means something different.

So, the chances are they're ALL ignorant of the Bible. Or they're all cherry picking their way through.

I've met gay Christians. I've even been to church with gay Christians in THEIR church. This church did not say gay people are bad, or evil, or sinners, or that they should be stoned to death, or that they should be stopped from shopping in stores.

I suppose they're ignorant simply because they don't follow YOUR interpretation (I mean cherry picking really) of the Bible.

Christophobic bigot.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Pretty straight-forward. This is a question to anyone who believes that business owners should be forced to abandon their religious beliefs in order to do business. Also, let me preface this by saying that I am non-religious and that, personally, I generally lean pro-choice and pro-gay-rights. This principle is an exception.

Why? Why should business owners be forced to offer certain forms of compensation (birth control, for instance) if the practice of their religion forbids it?

Why should business owners be forced to abandon their moral reservations and do business with people with whom they'd rather not?

The first amendment guarantees the free exercise of religion. Nowhere does it make an exception for the public sector. Nowhere does it say, "Except when doing business".

Nowhere in the bill of rights is the right to demand birth control as compensation from an employer. This is simply a commonly held opinion of leftists.

Nowhere in the bill of rights is the right to demand service of a business owner. Again, simply a commonly held opinion of leftists.

So if the Bill of Rights guarantees religious practice, but nowhere in the founding documents are the rights to demand service or particular forms of compensation, why do both of these things outweigh the right to free exercise?

Particularly, if gay rights activists say that equality of marriage is a right, and rights aren't up for a vote, then why do these same activists believe that the right to the free exercise of religion -can- be infringed when it suits their agenda?

Anyone? Why are your opinion-based rights more valid than the actual legal rights of religious business owners?

Gay rights, gay marriage, abortion, etc. These things are not religion, they are culture. They are the way so-called Christians interpret religion: they impose moral values on it that aren't there. They believe it is religion but it isn't. It is a set of morals that each individual sect and religion imposes on a belief in god.

It's like Muslim women coverning. There is nothing in the Koran that dictates they cover, only that they dress modestly. Milliions upon millions of modern Muslim women don't cover because it is an old fashioned cultural idea, not anything dictated in the Koran.

It's the same for Christians. Altough Catholics don't believe in abortion, there is nothing in the Bible to prohibit it. There is no explicit prohibition of abortion in either the Old Testament or New Testament books of the Christian Bible.

The attitude in the Old Testament, not the New Testament and therefore not literally Christianity, toward homosexuality is based ancient social ideas and an ancient understanding of science; they do not apply in the modern world. Hatred and non-acceptance of homosexuality is based in moral values that are ancient and are based themselves in a now defunct inderstanding of biology and science. http://www.stpetersloganville.org/images/Homosexuality_and_the_Bible.pdf.

No one is going against to their religion to serve gays or to bake gay wedding cakes: the idea is absurd. It's a moral issue and you don't have a right to turn away people from a business that serves the public because you don't agree with their lifestyle.

Another response about how these Christians are Christian'ing incorrectly.

Quite frankly, it doesn't matter what you think about the accuracy of their interpretation. It's -their- faith. Nowhere in the 1st Amendment does it specify that the free practice of religion hinges upon the practitioner's interpretation of their faith being something that you or anyone else finds reasonable or acceptable.

Um.....yes it does. It's whether that interpretation adversely affects other citizens' rights.

Now you're just confusing what's been said.

Whether or not someone else's interpretation adversely affects other citizens' rights is not a function of your opinion of their interpretation. I never said violation of someone's rights doesn't matter, I said what -you think- doesn't matter. What a weird conflation.

Anyway, if their interpretation says that they shouldn't offer birth control as compensation for labor on the basis of a voluntary contract, which "right" has been violated?