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.
U.S. Sen. Mike Lee of Utah and 21 GOP colleagues today introduced a new version of the bill, The Hill reports. An earlier version was introduced in both the House and Senate in 2015 but never advanced out of committee.
Supporters of this legislation are using religious liberty as a sword to hurt LGBTQ families rather than staying true to our long tradition of it serving as a shield to protect religious expression from government overreach.”
I understand why advocates are concerned but what they aren't understanding is that a large portion of the population currently believe the government is overreaching. Small business owners are being told they must choose between their sincerely held religious beliefs or their livelihood. These kind of laws get created over a government entity deciding a person's right to insist a particular baker make a cake is more important than that baker's belief that doing so would be participating in a sin, all while there is a baker down the street who would be thrilled for the opportunity to make the cake. The problem is that religious liberty is no longer serving as a shield, so lawmakers want to reestablish that function.
No one, and I mean no one, will ever convince me a person should have the right insist on a wedding cake created by a particular person even though I absolutely support their right to a government sanctioned marriage.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
U.S. Sen. Mike Lee of Utah and 21 GOP colleagues today introduced a new version of the bill, The Hill reports. An earlier version was introduced in both the House and Senate in 2015 but never advanced out of committee.
Every electoral cycle... the Republicans decide to present a bill, to wave with the base of the party.
This one may serve a different purpose. Remember, the Supreme Court is currently deciding on the fining of the Colorado baker and this may be an attempt to send a message to the court that should they rule against the baker legislative countermeasures will be taken. This isn't like trying to pass such a bill in 2015 when Obama would be waiting for it to hit his desk with the veto stamp in his hand. There is no telling what Trump's response would be, but they are probably correct in gambling that he'd sign it.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
I understand why advocates are concerned but what they aren't understanding is that a large portion of the population currently believe the government is overreaching. Small business owners are being told they must choose between their sincerely held religious beliefs or their livelihood. These kind of laws get created over a government entity deciding a person's right to insist a particular baker make a cake is more important than that baker's belief that doing so would be participating in a sin, all while there is a baker down the street who would be thrilled for the opportunity to make the cake. The problem is that religious liberty is no longer serving as a shield, so lawmakers want to reestablish that function.
No one, and I mean no one, will ever convince me a person should have the right insist on a wedding cake created by a particular person even though I absolutely support their right to a government sanctioned marriage.
It is already legal to be a bigot. Liberty allows it.
God's greatest gift to Humanity is free will. Free will allows choosing to be a bigot. Choose wisely ~ although free will also allows changing one's mind.
I understand why advocates are concerned but what they aren't understanding is that a large portion of the population currently believe the government is overreaching. Small business owners are being told they must choose between their sincerely held religious beliefs or their livelihood. These kind of laws get created over a government entity deciding a person's right to insist a particular baker make a cake is more important than that baker's belief that doing so would be participating in a sin, all while there is a baker down the street who would be thrilled for the opportunity to make the cake. The problem is that religious liberty is no longer serving as a shield, so lawmakers want to reestablish that function.
No one, and I mean no one, will ever convince me a person should have the right insist on a wedding cake created by a particular person even though I absolutely support their right to a government sanctioned marriage.
If you are going to follow Christ, you have to bake the cake. Christ didn't ask the orientation of those He fed or healed. He just did it. Religious liberty, in the context of following Christ, is to never be used as a shield one hides their bigotry behind. Christ urges us to do to others what we'd like done for us. He also warns us that whatever we do to, or for another person, we are doing to/for Him.
It doesn't mater what one thinks of gay couples, Christ, being a Jew, would have had negative feelings toward the Samaritan woman. He sat with her and talked with her anyway.
Christ didn't build walls of separation. He wouldn't have said "no gay people here", He routinely met with and ministered to those on the margins of society. And these Christian bakers that refuse, point to what they see as gay people's sins, while ignoring their own sin. All of us sin, and only one sin is worse than any other, and that one sin isn't gay sex. We need to stop judging, and be the servants Christ called us to be.
Quote:
“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
If you are going to follow Christ, you have to bake the cake. Christ didn't ask the orientation of those He fed or healed. He just did it. Religious liberty, in the context of following Christ, is to never be used as a shield one hides their bigotry behind. Christ urges us to do to others what we'd like done for us. He also warns us that whatever we do to, or for another person, we are doing to/for Him.
It doesn't mater what one thinks of gay couples, Christ, being a Jew, would have had negative feelings toward the Samaritan woman. He sat with her and talked with her anyway.
Christ didn't build walls of separation. He wouldn't have said "no gay people here", He routinely met with and ministered to those on the margins of society. And these Christian bakers that refuse, point to what they see as gay people's sins, while ignoring their own sin. All of us sin, and only one sin is worse than any other, and that one sin isn't gay sex. We need to stop judging, and be the servants Christ called us to be.
Matthew 25:31-46
This has nothing to do with MY religious beliefs. If I owned a bakery I'd happily bake any non-obscene cake for the standard price my bakery charged for the type of cake chosen. It is about the beliefs of the person feeling they are being asked to violate their religious beliefs. Religious beliefs are based on individual interpretations of texts, teachings, or rituals the specific individual is influenced by. Religious beliefs, by nature, are not fact based. They are beliefs, not truths. As long as they are bonafide, sincere, and part of a reasonably (not absolute) consistent pattern of the person's life, it not the place of others to question the legitimacy of those beliefs.
The government should only require private individuals, including privately held businesses, to violate those beliefs if it causes egregious harm to others that can not be redressed without creating an undue burden. If the bakery 5 miles away would happily make a cake for you, you are not suffering egregious harm, let alone being burdened in attempt to redress the alleged harm.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
Moderator - Diabetes and Kentucky (including Lexington & Louisville)
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.
