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.
Ok, you were right. I read your link about the sexual orientation discrimination laws from Washington and I stand corrected. However, I still believe a private company should be allowed to refuse service to anyone they see fit not because I am against gays, but because I am for freedom and against government interference. It appears as Washington has overruled the whole "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." And by doing so, they have taken away a particular right from a business owner.
That does not mean that I think it's kind of silly that the old lady wouldn't sell flowers to the dude because he was gay and getting married. I think that's just stupid, but Baptists and their hypocrisy doesn't change my opinion on preserving rights for everyone. There is nothing in the Constitution saying you can't by a hypocrite. At least not yet I suppose.
In any event, in case you haven't figured it out, I'm both for the right of the gay guy getting married, as well as for the old lady not selling him the flowers based on her religious views. It has to work both ways or you simply breed animosity.
SS
I am all for preserving rights for everyone. At the same time, I recognize that my rights end where another person's begin. I do not have the right to do anything I wish with no regard to the rights of others.
The florist has the right to not approve of homosexuality. She does not have the right to refuse service to a paying customer based on their sexual orientation.
It will be interesting to see how high this case goes.
Can you point me to any foundational document of any recognized religion that advocates genocide, much less commands it of the faithful?
Sure.
1 Samuel 15:3 (KJV)
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Deuteronomy 20:16-20 (KJV)
16: But in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes, 17: but you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Per'izzites, the Hivites and the Jeb'usites, as the LORD your God has commanded; 18: that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices which they have done in the service of their gods, and so to sin against the LORD your God.
Joshua 11:11-14 (KJV)
11: And they put to the sword all who were in it, utterly destroying them; there was none left that breathed, and he burned Hazor with fire. 12: And all the cities of those kings, and all their kings, Joshua took, and smote them with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them, as Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded. 13: But none of the cities that stood on mounds did Israel burn, except Hazor only; that Joshua burned. 14: And all the spoil of these cities and the cattle, the people of Israel took for their booty; but every man they smote with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed them, and they did not leave any that breathed.
I am all for preserving rights for everyone. At the same time, I recognize that my rights end where another person's begin. I do not have the right to do anything I wish with no regard to the rights of others.
The florist has the right to not approve of homosexuality. She does not have the right to refuse service to a paying customer based on their sexual orientation.
It will be interesting to see how high this case goes.
Ok, now we're debating.......
So are you saying that the gay guys rights should be able to infringe upon the old lady's rights to religious freedom? Because if so, that's kinda how the whole country got started, and in my opinion, it'll be kinda scary if she is no longer allowed to practice her religious freedom don't you think? I mean, here's the difference....it's HER business, not a public service provided for by taxpayer dollars. So basically, using your logic, a person willing to take a huge risk and start a business, through no help of the government, can't fully make decisions about their own business because of said government?
I am all for preserving rights for everyone. At the same time, I recognize that my rights end where another person's begin. I do not have the right to do anything I wish with no regard to the rights of others.
The florist has the right to not approve of homosexuality. She does not have the right to refuse service to a paying customer based on their sexual orientation.
It will be interesting to see how high this case goes.
Wrong, the 1st Amendment to the Constitution makes the right to freely exercise one's religion paramount to any laws that would infringe upon that right.
Slavery was abolished over 200 years ago in this country, yet now there is a select class of citizens who feel they are entitled to force people to provide services to them regardless of that person's religious beliefs. Forcing doctors to perform abortions, forcing business owners to pay for abortions, forcing bakers, florists and photographers to provide artistic services against their morals...or lose their livelihood.
Is this the Freedom or Liberty part of the American vision progressives dream about??
Now you're just being stupid. You know good and well I meant his description of how men think when they see an attractive woman, but you gave it a good ol' college girl try.
Maybe you only remember the parts of his post that excited you personally? I blocked the whole sausage rubbing comment out of my mind, also due to genetics.
This has been a fun and spirited conversation however.
SS
Well, I wasn't commenting on his description of how men think about women, but about how men think about men. I would think that my comment about repressed homosexuality made that rather obvious.
No, I'm a woman and am not wired that way. I'm not into porn, not into talking about other people rubbing their genitals. I'm not offended, but not excited either. I think that is fairly common for women.
I don't run a store front these days but I make a product and sell it, mostly wholesale and I do not have any person of the muslim faith working for me. Nor JW"s or Mormons and a few others. I only hire people who have the same religious faith as I do. THat's my right. I don't tell them that but I hire so few and those types hardly ever come around but that's my rule and practice. I make it a point to seek employees I want so I don't list jobs where it might attract those I don't want to deal with.
I also ask questions and research anyone or any company I buy materials from to make sure they don't employee those of the Muslim faiths or support causes I am against. That's my right.
I sell to only those I approve. As a wholesale company I have that right. I protect my customers by not selling to competing retail outlets and have other limits.
Did you read the article? They said she is southern Baptist, in which case if true, rationalizing hypocrisy is 2nd nature.
You know why you always take 2 Baptists fishing with you? Because if you only bring one, he'll drink all your beer. If you bring 2, neither one will touch it.
SS
Southern Baptist Convention also says wives should be subservient to husbands.
"A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.."
How the husband and wife can be "equal" when one must "submit" to the other escapes me.
I am all for preserving rights for everyone. At the same time, I recognize that my rights end where another person's begin.
Huh? You are a college gal ain't ya?
So how about my right to pursue life, liberty and happiness.......if you make me unhappy, that means your rights have to end, and you need to do whatever I say so I can continue my right to pursue happiness?
I think you're probably a sweet girl, but those professors are ruining you darling. Again, don't get your agendas confused with freedom and liberty. They can and will be in conflict throughout your life.
Does her "relationship with Jesus Christ" also prevent her from selling flowers to Jews, Muslims, or atheists?
Are these Jews/Muslims/Atheist proven sinners?????? IF yes.....then her doctrines state she has to stay away from them. End of story.
"Sinners?" Christianity and Judaism list a couple people in the sinner category you are to stay away from. Help them yes, outside of that YOU ARE NOT TO ASSOCIATE WITH THEM IN ANY FORM ......
NOT EVEN COMMERCE(sinners money is a NO, NO too)......which if argued in court can be won regardless what unjust laws are put forth, because at the end of the day:
GOVERNMENT CANNOT INTERFERE WITH RELIGIOUS BELIEFs. So Petunia the faux legal mind here on the forum could be blown right out of the court room with her commerce argument.
The First Amendment prohibits the federal government from making a law "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
So Petunias "commerce law" is doing what? I would wipe courtroom floor with Petunias argument.
"FREEDOM OF RELIGION" is a closed end statement and cannot be tampered with NO MATTER how Liberal Judges and dimwit lawyers want to put a spin on it.
When The Rabbi Jesus the Christitans mentor/spiritual leader went ballistics in the Temple of the because the COMMERCE(dirty money) being conducted on hallowed ground, he was admonishing his followers not to conduct business or buy(DIRTY MONEY) on hallowed ground, IT IS A SIN. Again I would wipe the court room floor with Petunias commerce law argument, because she/he/it has NO IDEA............what Christian/Jewish SPIRITUALITY is all about.
It is best to live and let live. Sodomites want to live and be left alone but they don't want to do the same for others because they are bullies and whinny selfish b*
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Deuteronomy 20:16-20 (KJV)
16: But in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes, 17: but you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Per'izzites, the Hivites and the Jeb'usites, as the LORD your God has commanded; 18: that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices which they have done in the service of their gods, and so to sin against the LORD your God.
Joshua 11:11-14 (KJV)
11: And they put to the sword all who were in it, utterly destroying them; there was none left that breathed, and he burned Hazor with fire. 12: And all the cities of those kings, and all their kings, Joshua took, and smote them with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them, as Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded. 13: But none of the cities that stood on mounds did Israel burn, except Hazor only; that Joshua burned. 14: And all the spoil of these cities and the cattle, the people of Israel took for their booty; but every man they smote with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed them, and they did not leave any that breathed.
Well if they're going to start slaying a$$es, I best be gettin' along now. Y'all have a wonderful evening.
A public entity is one that is operated by government, thus OWNED by the public. Public Enterprise is an oxymoron. I agree that no public operation can discriminate against anyone, since it is basically owned by everyone.
This is a PRIVATE business, owned by a private individual, who happens to be a devout Christian. In the real world, her right to freely engage in her faith should not be impeded by state laws intended to provide special privileges to a select class of citizens.
The Washington state legislature disagreed with you in 2006 when it passed the Law Against Discrimination. The current Washington Attorney General disagrees with you. The judge who heard the case disagrees with you.
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 are a college gal ain't ya? 
Are they sinners or not?
