Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It has been asked many times and never answered. Typically just the usual belligerent and combative retorts accompanied by various inane name calling because there will always be disagreement on this topic. Public accommodation blah blah blah doesn't need to be repeated ad nauseam, okay? However why would two homosexual males (or females) go into a bakery, see the crosses hanging on the wall alongside framed passages from the bible, and then insist on trying to order a homosexualized “wedding” cake when they know full well in advance that 1) the proprietors are people of faith, 2) they will not ever get a cake for a homosexualized “wedding”, and most importantly 3) they would never in their right minds ever eat a cake made by somebody forced against their will. Instead just go to the plethora of homosexual friendly businesses where you will get and actually consume the "wedding" cake that you want.
When the baker asks for the name of the bride and groom, as is the case for all traditional weddings, the very thing the homosexual militants hate with a passion, the two darlings instead reply that there are two “grooms” and proceed to throw a hissy fit. The number of religious establishments is few and far between yet the homosexual militants manage to deliberately seek out and find the rare religious businesses intentionally just so they can make a political statement and get media attention at the expense of decent hard working people just trying to make a living and put food on their table only to be shut down because a couple disgruntled malcontents didn’t get their way. This is exactly how many in the general public see these antics and their sympathy goes to the religious proprietor obviously being picked on and bullied.
It has been asked many times and never answered. Typically just the usual belligerent and combative retorts accompanied by various inane name calling because there will always be disagreement on this topic. Public accommodation blah blah blah doesn't need to be repeated ad nauseam, okay? However why would two homosexual males (or females) go into a bakery, see the crosses hanging on the wall alongside framed passages from the bible, and then insist on trying to order a homosexualized “wedding” cake when they know full well in advance that 1) the proprietors are people of faith, 2) they will not ever get a cake for a homosexualized “wedding”, and most importantly 3) they would never in their right minds ever eat a cake made by somebody forced against their will. Instead just go to the plethora of homosexual friendly businesses where you will get and actually consume the "wedding" cake that you want.
When the baker asks for the name of the bride and groom, as is the case for all traditional weddings, the very thing the homosexual militants hate with a passion, the two darlings instead reply that there are two “grooms” and proceed to throw a hissy fit. The number of religious establishments is few and far between yet the homosexual militants manage to deliberately seek out and find the rare religious businesses intentionally just so they can make a political statement and get media attention at the expense of decent hard working people just trying to make a living and put food on their table only to be shut down because a couple disgruntled malcontents didn’t get their way. This is exactly how many in the general public see these antics and their sympathy goes to the religious proprietor obviously being picked on and bullied.
Towns may only one bakery to choose from. Anyway, I don't understand why a baker should feel such deep hatred and resentment against homosexuals that he wants nothing to do with them as customers. Sure, he may not like how they have oral sex, or any type of homo sex, because he finds it grossly repugnant, but quite frankly it's none of his business how consenting adults want to have sex in privacy.
I'm not saying I do, but what if I like to have anal oral sex with women? Does that give a businessman the right to have nothing to do with me as a customer, because he thinks how I like to have sex is too grossly offensive? I don't think so.
Towns may only one bakery to choose from. Anyway, I don't understand why a baker should feel such deep hatred and resentment against homosexuals that he wants nothing to do with them as customers. Sure, he may not like how they have oral sex, or any type of homo sex, because he finds it grossly repugnant, but quite frankly it's none of his business how consenting adults want to have sex in privacy.
I'm not saying I do, but what if I like to have anal oral sex with women? Does that give a businessman the right to have nothing to do with me as a customer, because he thinks how I like to have sex is too grossly offensive? I don't think so.
I find the concept of forcing people to work, very Un-American. How/why we even know why the service was declined is odd.
Towns may only one bakery to choose from. Anyway, I don't understand why a baker should feel such deep hatred and resentment against homosexuals that he wants nothing to do with them as customers. Sure, he may not like how they have oral sex, or any type of homo sex, because he finds it grossly repugnant, but quite frankly it's none of his business how consenting adults want to have sex in privacy.
I'm not saying I do, but what if I like to have anal oral sex with women? Does that give a businessman the right to have nothing to do with me as a customer, because he thinks how I like to have sex is too grossly offensive? I don't think so.
What makes you think the baker felt "deep hatred and resentment?" Can you cite anything at all where this was reported in that case? He is a Christian. He believes marriage is only between a man and a woman. He did not wish to dignify a homosexual "marriage" with his labor by making a custom cake (that was his business) for their "wedding." I think he was well within his rights. No one should be forced to provide a service for an event which goes against their religion, forcing them to be a participant. It's that simple. I stand by that.
You people always like to misrepresent the facts and re-frame the argument to something else, in order to paint the victim (the baker) as a "homophobic hater," or worse. This wasn't about homosexual sex, sex acts or anything else that homosexuals may engage in. It was about "gay marriage," and a man's right not to participate by providing his services for something that he knows to be wrong, and against the teachings of scripture. Period.
This "gay" duo had no right to force him into their service.
Christianphobia that is why. They are hateful bigots against Christians.
Odd how there is no such official term for haters of Christians. They have homophobe, Islamaphobe etc... But not Christianphobes. Wonder why? Double standards.
I'm going to start using that term. I just made it up but it exists and there are certainly people it applies to. I encourage everyone else to start using it against haters of Christians and Christianity.
If you have a problem with people thinking that christians are bigoted and hateful then I guess you guys shouldn't have been bigoted and hateful to begin with. If you wouldn't try and force your beliefs on everyone then maybe people would be a little more accepting of you. People are tired of being told how to live their lives from christians who barely keep their own faith as it is. People are tired of hearing christians whine and moan endlessly about this or that person trampling the constitution while they themselves try to twist the Establishment Clause into something that it's not. Just a few examples to try and clarify why so many people resent your religion.
It has been asked many times and never answered. Typically just the usual belligerent and combative retorts accompanied by various inane name calling because there will always be disagreement on this topic. Public accommodation blah blah blah doesn't need to be repeated ad nauseam, okay? However why would two homosexual males (or females) go into a bakery, see the crosses hanging on the wall alongside framed passages from the bible, and then insist on trying to order a homosexualized “wedding” cake when they know full well in advance that 1) the proprietors are people of faith, 2) they will not ever get a cake for a homosexualized “wedding”, and most importantly 3) they would never in their right minds ever eat a cake made by somebody forced against their will. Instead just go to the plethora of homosexual friendly businesses where you will get and actually consume the "wedding" cake that you want.
When the baker asks for the name of the bride and groom, as is the case for all traditional weddings, the very thing the homosexual militants hate with a passion, the two darlings instead reply that there are two “grooms” and proceed to throw a hissy fit. The number of religious establishments is few and far between yet the homosexual militants manage to deliberately seek out and find the rare religious businesses intentionally just so they can make a political statement and get media attention at the expense of decent hard working people just trying to make a living and put food on their table only to be shut down because a couple disgruntled malcontents didn’t get their way. This is exactly how many in the general public see these antics and their sympathy goes to the religious proprietor obviously being picked on and bullied.
Bingo! We have a winner. You're exactly right.
Bullying is what homosexuals do best. It isn't about tolerance. They demand acceptance.
False. Being gay has nothing to do with behavior or a lifestyle. It refers to one's attractions. A gay virgin is still gay.
I don't think you grasp basic English. The verb, to be, as in "Being" denotes a state of existence. It has nothing to do with an action or behavior. Being gay refers to one's attractions, not their behavior or actions.
You obviously know nothing about the subject. The Bible wasn't written in English and never condemned homosexuality in the original scriptures.
Yes, actually it does. Something being natural means it exists in nature. It doesn't necessarily mean moral, but you didn't use moral. Again, you lack understanding of rudimentary English.
Suffice to say, no one has any reason to listen to a word you say since your arguments are not based on evidence or correct understanding.
My English is just fine..... You can't offer any counter arguments back. Not once did you ever make a point, your only defense is to make false grammar attacks. Guess that means you lose.
Bullying is what homosexuals do best. It isn't about tolerance. They demand acceptance.
I don't think that the average homosexuals are bullies of support this kind of stuff, just the Gay Mafia activist ones. I see gays in two different groups, one of just regular gays who just live their lives respectfully like everyone else, and the gay activist group who is aggressively militant and wants to tread on people and push their lifestyle onto everyone
The problem is not gay people, it's just the Gay Activist Mafia who are one of the most intolerant and hateful group of people around. I put them just a step below the KKK and Neo Nazis. But they do force businesses to close, just like the Nazis did to the Jewish businesses. They try to force their will on everyone, lie and twist the Bible to support their lifestyle, the Nazis did the same thing to support killing Jews, and they have a lot of junk science which they lobbied to havedone , just like the Nazis did with their junk science about eugenincs .
Now by no means are gay activists the same, but there are a lot of similarites in their tactics, only difference is gay activists do not kill people. They do have liberal Hollywood and media on their side, this is their biggest allie as it pretty much influences non free thinkers, especially young people.
Most of the people I know that support it only do so because it's popular opinion (I'm a 20 yo College Student), or because of liberal professors and celebrities who support it. That's literally the only reason they care.
I wish to voice the opinion that these arguments are stupid and nonsense.
Throughout the country there are hundreds if not thousands of Jewish Kosher restaurants and caterers and Muslim Halal restaurants and caterers. They all have a perfect legal right not to serve pork because that is not a product they carry. Not more than 10 minute walk from my house is a kosher deli - Koch's Delicatessen on Locust near 43rd, and a middle eastern Halal restaurant - Sa'ad's Restaurant on Walnut and 45th ... and they do not have to serve pork. Got that? As restaurants open to the public, they can NOT however turn away an African American or a woman or a Hindu.
I think you just made my point. They have the legal right not to serve pork. They would also have the legal right to refuse to serve pork if they were asked to provide it for a catered event, such as a pig roast, would they not? I think your answer was, "yes."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Park
If you were complaining about churches being forced to perform same sex weddings I would understand your concern, but we are talking about businesses here ... public accommodations.
I am a landlord. Can I legally discriminate and refuse to rent to a black person, a Mexican, a Jew, a gay person, a woman, a senior citizen? Of course not, not in my county anyway.
If I was a Christian landlord would I have a right to refuse to rent to people of other religions? Of course not. Can the Christian owner of a business or corporation that employs a certain number of people and offers goods and services to the general public refuse to employ a person based on the fact they are not Christian? Of course not.
I think you have a very illogical view of American laws.
Here we go again with the obfuscations. The man was asked to provide his service for a "gay wedding." Renting an apartment isn't the same thing.
I think you need to read the linked article. Obviously, you didn't. Not only are misrepresenting the facts, you are making arguments that are not at issue.
How far do the owners go with denying services based on their religion, do they also consistently refuse people that are living out of wedlock, people that sleep around, thieves, wife beaters. Does religion only come into play for gays.
Oh, please! You're comparisons are silly.
Can we please keep the argument centered on whether or not a Christian can be forced to legitimize a "gay wedding" by providing his services? The man made custom wedding cakes. He wasn't selling cookies!
The same argument holds true for the case of the photographer who refused his services. How can a private contractor be forced into the service of another against his will?
We're talking about forced labor. You cannot force someone to work for another if he does not want to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're comparisons are silly.