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.
I disagree. "Bob" can refuse their specifications, but he can't refuse to sell them a cake. If he did, the couple would have grounds to sue for race discrimination.
He can refuse to sell the KKK couple a cake because he doesn't like their attire. ("no shoes, no shirt, no service" "jacket/tie required").
He cannot refuse to sell them a cake because they're white.
Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love everybody as yourself. He didn't single out homosexuals as an especially sinful group of people worthy of much scorn or avoidance.
Jesus said the greatest commandment was to love everybody as yourself. He didn't single out homosexuals as an especially sinful group of people worthy of much scorn or avoidance.
Exactly right.
He never mentioned homosexuality at all.
No city or town discriminated against Chick-Fil-A whatsoever, although a couple of foolish politicians expressed anti-CFA points of views in order to make headelines and score points with their base.
So no Chick-Fil-A was closed down, got it?
You cannot cite one case where a city discriminated against a CFA.
However, several private universities did say they choose not to open a CFA on their campus, which is legal because they are private institutions.
Rationalize all you want, but you're doing nothing but defending discrimination based on religion. Progressives across the country celebrated efforts to block chick-fil-a restaurants based on their religious beliefs. It really doesn't get any more discriminatory than that. It's the polar opposite of diversity, the opposite of coexisting. It is the embodiment of everything they claim to be against.
No one wants to milk that cow. Gayism is propagated by straight do gooders. You would think that Gays would be interested in gay issues. Gays just want to have a gay ol time...The topic is redundant.
Really, that makes "good sense"? It sounds like a greasy little workaround to discriminate against someone to me. Why not have the conviction to be honest to your beliefs instead of applauding word games?
In a piece by Erick Erickson over at Red State, the question of "involuntary servitude" is once again raised in a case concerning a "Gay Wedding." The question is, "should a Christian who believes a wedding can only be between a man and a woman be forced to provide goods and services to a "gay wedding?"" Would this not be "involuntary servitude," a violation of the 13th Amendment?
I raised this point in a thread on Arizona's proposed law (now vetoed by Governor Brewer’s cowardice) a while back, based on the observation of another writer, whom I believe (if memory serves) is an attorney. That writer was referring to the case of the Christian bakery that baked custom wedding cakes, and refused to provide a cake for a "gay" couple, because of his Christian beliefs. The client sued, the court ruled against the baker, and the baker was forced out of business. Similar cases involve a photographer who refused to photograph a “gay wedding” and a florist who refused to do the flower arranging for a “gay wedding.” In each case, they argued that because of their religious beliefs, they could not provide the requested service.
These court cases relied on a religious liberty argument based on the First Amendment. As Erick points out, "committed Christians believe in a doctrine of vocation. They believe that their work is a form of ministry. Through their work they can share the gospel and glorify God." Erick points out that the claim of "gay rights" activists is that Jesus would have baked the cake; so Christian bakers should too. However, Jesus "affirmed in the Gospel of Matthew that marriage is between one man and one woman. He also told the various sinners he encountered to “sin no more.” So it becomes highly dubious that Christ would bake a cake for a “gay wedding,” and he most certainly would not preside over the service."
But the other constitutional question involves the Thirteenth Amendment question of involuntary servitude. How can a person be forced to provide a service against his will? If a Christian is forced against his will to participate in a ceremony, which he believes to be debauchery, that it dishonors God, and that such participation would be causing him to sin, is that not involuntary servitude?
Should a Muslim or Jewish caterer be forced to provide food and services for a pig roast or pork barbeque?
The MSM and the “gay” activists in these cases have mischaracterized laws such as SB1062 as anti-gay. They are not. They are aimed at protecting the Liberty of religious people to refuse to be used in celebration something that violates their beliefs.
I believe that these businesses have been deliberately and specifically targeted because of their beliefs, for the purpose of bringing suit, in order to advance the gay agenda, tear down the traditional moral codes of society, and destroy the Christian Faith as a relevant belief system, declaring it antiquated, homophobic, racist, backward, and anti-progress.
There is no gay agenda. They just want to be accepted.
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 am sure you can drive to the next town then to find one or even order online. It is not about that is it what it is is some gay people think everyone should believe the same thing they do if not they will make that persons life miserable which is quite intolerant. Just because you do not agree with someone's behavior does not make you a hater.
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.
