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.
In the vast majority of states it has been voted out but unelected federal appointee activist judges have overturned the expressed will of the people. This is not over and the majority of the people will not "get used to it". This is far from over.
The homosexual militant bully community incorrectly believes that some unelected judges decision has made everyone everywhere, yes everywhere, accept and consider two same sex partners somehow as the equivalent of a man woman marriage. Unless one of the partners is opposite the sex of the other this equation does not, can not, and never will be the equal or equivalent of a man woman marriage which marries, completes, combines and makes the unification of the TWO sexes. Children are not required or necessary for this, just a joyful outcome that two same sex individuals will never under any circumstance achieve no matter how hard they try. How many people in the history of humanity have been the result of a homosexual coupling? None. Zero. Nada. Nor will it ever happen.
All they got is a piece of paper. They can frantically wave and prance around with it but it will never mean anything unless or until society desires and accepts two same sex individuals as the unification of the two sexes. Since one element of the equation, the opposite sex component, is absent and always missing this is not ever possible and a likelihood coefficient that does not exist.
That's true, but ruling against gay marriage based upon the 10th Amendment would essentially also undo Loving v. Virginia and besides the fact that the court is generally loathe to go against precedent, they probably don't want to open the pandora's box of making it legal for states to outlaw interracial marriage again, so an educated guess is that they'll let the federal court rulings striking down anti-gay marriage laws stand and simply refuse to hear the cases at least for the time being. But the court has already faced this argument in the Loving v. Virginia and the 14th Amendment won.
And there you go.
Quote:
Does a customer have the RIGHT to force a business owner to serve them?
IMO, the answer to that is, and MUST be, a resounding NO!
Well - YES - a business owner MUST serve the public. What part of that basic premise is so difficult to understand??
You can't open a restaurant and refuse service based on race - that is discrimination.
You can't run a Real Estate Agency and refuse to show houses to Chinese people - that is discrimination.
You can't run a tuxedo rental business and refuse to rent to Mexicans - that is discrimination.
AND - you can't run a BRIDAL SHOP - that is OPEN TO THE PUBLIC - and refuse to sell to GAY WOMEN because they are GAY - that is discrimination.
Yu don't have to celebrate the engagement - attend the wedding - send a gift - or remember their anniversary - but you have to let them SHOP at your BRIDAL SALON.
(OR - make it a PRIVATE SHOP - with a MEMBER LIST - and RESTRICT SALES to only those on your list - good luck with that)
Are you suggesting that you ARE qualified to interpret the Bible? The Bible has been translated and interpreted so many different times, how can you be so sure that the way YOU interpret it, is the correct way? People continue to interpret and study the Bible and still disagree on what passages mean, because it's all an interpretation. But regardless, that doesn't matter because the Christian Bible or any religious book for that matter don't get to dictate how a diverse society is governed.
There are many ways to interpret the Bible and other religious books. You would be surprised with MY interpretations as you do not and cannot see what I see in these publications. To me these materials are what you here in this time and place would refer to as “code” books. I find them special.
I think it's dumb that they turn away customers; however, a private business should be allowed to do business with whom they choose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraven
Be that as it may, there is still the matter of RIGHTS! Should a business owner have the RIGHT to refuse service to anyone?
IMO, the answer to that is, and MUST be, a resounding YES!
Does a customer have the RIGHT to force a business owner to serve them?
IMO, the answer to that is, and MUST be, a resounding NO!
100% agree with this. However, the public also has the right to voice their disapproval and shop somewhere else.
The homosexual militant bully community incorrectly believes.
Stop playing the victim card, it is getting old
"Same-sex marriage in Pennsylvania became legal on May 20, 2014, when a U.S. federal district court judge ruled that the Commonwealth's 1996 statutory ban on recognizing same-sex marriage was unconstitutionall"
The lesbian wanted to get married in a state where gay marriage is LEGAL. She wanted to buy a dress in a bridal shop located in a state where gay marriage is LEGAL. She didn't go to the anti-gay marriage territory.
There are many ways to interpret the Bible and other religious books. You would be surprised with MY interpretations as you do not and cannot see what I see in these publications. To me these materials are what you here in this time and place would refer to as “code” books. I find them special.
What is YOUR interpretation of this then
"
1 Peter 3:8
Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind. "
I shall continue to play any and all cards that I so choose my dear. How you personally interpret them is not only incorrect but your problem.
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.