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.
Nothing "unrelated" about it.
You brought up Leviticus. And as per usual with the Leviticus argument, you want to pick and choose which verses are relevant and which are not.
Have you read Leviticus Ch. 18? Versus 6 - 24? The entire section deals with sins of the flesh, including incest, bestiality and homosexuality. How can that be picking an irrelevant verse? If anything, when taken in context, there is no other meaning to be made and no other verse more relevant!
[quote/]Why wouldn't they?
Because unmarried people rarely need flower arrangements for a wedding ceremony???
[quote/And, if the people told her that, do you reasonably believe that she would have denied them service?
If she had denied service to someone in one of these other groups, she would have at least appeared consistent in her beliefs. But, she didn't. Because she isn't.[/quote]
You have no idea whether or not she has or has not declined to serve anyone else on the basis of a conflict with her religious beliefs because if she had, it would never have come to light, because it is only homosexuals who are seeking special privileges and are the only people bullying private business owners to violate their religious beliefs.
To the contrary. Rights in America are moving towards being for all, rather than for a select few. We started out giving rights to only white male landowners. Look how far we have come.
No they aren't. Homosexuals want special rights granted to them based solely on their sexual preference. Homosexuals are currently equally free to marry under the same laws as heterosexuals. But, because homosexuals prefer matching genitalia, they demand special privileges and unequal treatment by society catering to their sexual proclivities by force of the State.
Before my time but I wonder if businesses which refused to serve blacks alongside whites also made Bible-referenced claims for doing so..
What difference does it make. I support the right to choose. If a business does not provide services to blacks, I might not use that business myself. But I support that right to choose.
To add on what Wolf said, if you as a business owner want to refuse to provide a good or service to someone because of their sexual orientation based on your religion, then why stop there?
Do you (in general, not you, specifically) really think a business owner who refuses the business of someone who's gay or in a homosexual relationship is going to turn away divorced parents? Someone with a tattoo on their wrist? Asking an engaged couple if they're already having sex or living together, and if they say "yes", then denying their business?
Anti-gay proponents always talk about a 'slippery slope' as part of their reasoning for their belief, but what about a slippery slope here? Where would we draw the line? Refusing people who had kids out of wedlock, refusing people with tattoos, refusing people who eat shellfish, refusing someone who accidentally used God's name in vain after some bleep cut them off in traffic, etc. That's a problem.
By the way, I'm a Christian. I just try not to be a hypocrite. (Not calling you one.)
I am neither a Christian, nor a hypocrite. I personally believe that a private business owner should have the right to refuse anyone service for any reason. If they don't have a valid reason, then they will lose customers and their business will fail.
I am not any "anti-gay proponent." I am a "pro-Liberty proponent" and that means that I stand behind the private business owner and her constitutionally guaranteed right to the free exercise of her religion over the tyranny of the state to cater to the special treatment demanded by a distinct class of people.
And again, arguing reductio ad absurdum only shows that you have no real argument again the logic presented.
What difference does it make. I support the right to choose. If a business does not provide services to blacks, I might not use that business myself. But I support that right to choose.
Ok. You do not know then and neither do I. I can see both the business and moral side of this. I wonder how the Law will weigh in.
Tough time to be a Court Justice. Really have to parse your language in decisions.
I am neither a Christian, nor a hypocrite. I personally believe that a private business owner should have the right to refuse anyone service for any reason. If they don't have a valid reason, then they will lose customers and their business will fail.
I am not any "anti-gay proponent." I am a "pro-Liberty proponent" and that means that I stand behind the private business owner and her constitutionally guaranteed right to the free exercise of her religion over the tyranny of the state to cater to the special treatment demanded by a distinct class of people.
And again, arguing reductio ad absurdum only shows that you have no real argument again the logic presented.
So basically you just pulled a latin term out of your bag of tricks to avoid answering the question. It's beyond the desire for a distinct group to be treated like princes and princesses, it's setting a dangerous precedent - to freely discriminate under the guise of some religious doctrine or belief.
No they aren't. Homosexuals want special rights granted to them based solely on their sexual preference. Homosexuals are currently equally free to marry under the same laws as heterosexuals. But, because homosexuals prefer matching genitalia, they demand special privileges and unequal treatment by society catering to their sexual proclivities by force of the State.
Let's flip this around. Let's say the law was that you could ONLY marry someone of the same sex. Wouldn't you be fighting to have this changed so that you could marry who you wanted? Wouldn't you want this law changed? Could we then say the same thing about you? You prefer different genitalia and you are demanding special privileges due to unequal treatment.
He wouldn't deny them either. The beauty of it is He was sacrificed so that we all may be saved! BTW we ALL sin! It's in our nature. You do also know what Jesus said about passing judgement on others too? At any rate, while it is the woman's right to do so, me personally in good conscience I could not deny anyone or discriminate against anyone based soley on their skin color, gender, or sexual orientation be it in public or private. Now if you're being an a-hole, and trying to start trouble...well... now that's different! Anyway, I don't think God would send you, me this lady into the eternal lake of fire over selling flowers to a gay couple for their wedding. I also don't think God is going to send divorcees to Hell for divorce over a bad or even abusive marriage. Now, if you are truly a wicked and evil individual, and murder someone or many others in cold blood without remorse, or steal and treat others badly without remorse, yeah I think maybe you just may be in trouble! But even then if scripture holds true even THEY can be forgiven! I mean, after all on the day that Christ was being crucified a common thief was also being crucified, and Christ told him believe and you will be with me.
I don't think ANYONE on this thread has stated they are without sin.
I am not a Christian, but I find it really difficult to believe that Jesus would embrace murderers, adulterers, or anyone who proudly proclaims their sins and has no intention of repenting or turning away from those sinful actions set out by God. My understanding is that all sinners can be forgiven, but that requires the acceptance of God and His laws and repentance and turning away from one's sinful nature.
Isn't part of believing in Christ, believing that he is the son of God? If so, why would the son of God, deny the commandments and admonitions set out by God?
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.
