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.
But what if I am an agnostic baker and so have no religious beliefs? And I find gay sex acts to be grossly repugnant. I further feel that people who do such acts are not worthy of marriage done their way. Therefore, I refuse to sell them a wedding cake. Wouldn't I be in trouble with the law from violating anti-discrimination laws, while religious bakers could claim religious objections and not have to sell wedding cakes to gays? If so, that's not fair. No wonder some people feel atheists and agnostics need protection.
It isn't fair. It's why I disagree with this law and the reasons for this law.
But that's what conservatives do. They worry about the sex lives and body parts of other people. Christ, it keeps them up at night.
That's why I say bakers are in the wrong business, if they can't live with the fact they will get people of all types wanting their baked goods. One day the baker could show a gay couple the door for wanting a gay wedding cake. The next day the baker could unknowingly sell candied cup cakes to a child molester, who uses them to seduce children. That's a sick position to be in to refuse to sell to gays and turn around and sell to a child molester. That the baker didn't know is no excuse, because he isn't always going to know when he's selling to a gay, or anybody else whose lifestyle he may strongly oppose.
Because right-wing bakers lose less by having to sell cakes to people they don't want to than those people would lose living in a society where people are free to officially discriminate against them to their personal detriment. And having to sell a guy a cake is not being forced to support anything. You're still free to oppose it as you sell your damned cake.
You're wrong, of course.
According to Miriam Webster: Support
2. a (1): to promote the interests or cause of b (1): assist, help
When the law forces Christians to do more than simply offer a product for sale, but to render special services which involves their active participation (custom made cake to the specifications of the patron, photography services that require attendance, posing subjects, setting up props, etc., custom floral arrangements to the patrons specifications), is that not "support," as defined above?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun
I see little difference between forcing someone to sit in the back of the bus because you disapprove of their behaviour and not the colour of their skin. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't make a lot of difference to the people in the back of the bus either. Behaviour might not be the same as race, but discrimination because of behaviour is pretty much the same as discrimination because of race.
This is ludicrous. Now we're really pushing the envelope. Refusing to perform a service is forcing no action on the one soliciting service. It is the business owner who is the victim here, who is being forced to do something against their will. This is so typical of the Left, and homosexual activists.
That's why I say bakers are in the wrong business, if they can't live with the fact they will get people of all types wanting their baked goods. One day the baker could show a gay couple the door for wanting a gay wedding cake. The next day the baker could unknowingly sell candied cup cakes to a child molester, who uses them to seduce children. That's a sick position to be in to refuse to sell to gays and turn around and sell to a child molester. That the baker didn't know is no excuse, because he isn't always going to know when he's selling to a gay, or anybody else whose lifestyle he may strongly oppose.
There is a big difference between selling goods versus having your product represented or endorsed at a function that they consider is immoral. Gosh, liberals just seem incapable of understanding the perspective from the other side of the debate.
Well nobody responded to my post asking for someone with legal knowledge to clarify exactly what the new amended changes in the religious bills from Indiana and Arkansas mean for the rights of gay people and religious businesses.
I will attempt to research it but so far the articles are too vague about what the changes actually mean and what the law actually says.
Who the hell are YOU to judge?
Sorry, but your OPINION about what is a "sin" is of no importance.
Who made YOU king of the world?
If you believe that homosexuality is a "sin" don't engage in it - that's your right, but that's where your right ends - with YOU, you have no right to punish others for something YOU believe is wrong. Only the LAW can do that. Your personal views have no merit.
Ken
Who are you to say I cannot judge such behavior for what it is? I'll let God be the judge of the individual, but I certainly do have the right to judge the behavior, as well as the act of homosexual "marriage," according to God's standard; that homosexual behavior is sin, and that the bond of marriage is only between one man and one woman, and further that He tells us when a man and a woman unite in marriage, "the two become one". Marriage is a sacred bond. It is not simply a legal formality.
Further, the idea of "homosexual 'marriage'" mocks God's creation, because He created man, and he created woman for man, and He created them male and female and He made marriage for them. "The two shall become one flesh."
It is my right to exercise my religion freely, and it is not your right to punish me for doing so; i.e., if I am a business owner, a baker, and refuse your request for me to bake a custom wedding cake for your homosexual wedding, because I don't want to be a party to something that God says is wrong, you should not have the right to destroy my business by filing a lawsuit, forcing me to close, and possibly losing my home and all my possessions.
The homosexual activists have become the ugly face of evil in our country. Their goal is to destroy every Christian business, and attack Christians in every way they can. Does this sound a little like what the Muslim terrorists do? The homosexual activists are American terrorists, and their target is any Christian business, church, or Christian politician. They are out to destroy even the Constitutional protections that are the First Amendment. Make no mistake. And I will fight this with all that is within me.
So true. Conservative Christian bakers live in fear they may have to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple, but the next day they may unknowingly sell candy covered cup cakes to a child molester, who uses them to seduce children. If they can't live with those possibilities, they shouldn't be in a business open to the public.
Oh, please. Do you seriously think that is a valid analogy and argument. If so, you don't understand the issue at all.
Again, if your phony baloney God wants you to openly and arbitrarily* discriminate against "sinners" who participate in a lifestyle you disagree with, DON'T OPEN A BUSINESS TO THE PUBLIC.
Don't like adulterers? Don't work at a strip club. Don't believe in working on Sunday? Stay away from Walmart.
See how this works?
(*I say arbitrarily because I've never heard of an obese person being denied service at a Christian bakery. Gluttony = ok. Being gay = not okay).
These are all invalid arguments. They are all straw man arguments.
Who are you to say I cannot judge such behavior for what it is? I'll let God be the judge of the individual, but I certainly do have the right to judge the behavior, as well as the act of homosexual "marriage," according to God's standard; that homosexual behavior is sin, and that the bond of marriage is only between one man and one woman, and further that He tells us when a man and a woman unite in marriage, "the two become one". Marriage is a sacred bond. It is not simply a legal formality.
Further, the idea of "homosexual 'marriage'" mocks God's creation, because He created man, and he created woman for man, and He created them male and female and He made marriage for them. "The two shall become one flesh."
It is my right to exercise my religion freely, and it is not your right to punish me for doing so; i.e., if I am a business owner, a baker, and refuse your request for me to bake a custom wedding cake for your homosexual wedding, because I don't want to be a party to something that God says is wrong, you should not have the right to destroy my business by filing a lawsuit, forcing me to close, and possibly losing my home and all my possessions.
The homosexual activists have become the ugly face of evil in our country. Their goal is to destroy every Christian business, and attack Christians in every way they can. Does this sound a little like what the Muslim terrorists do? The homosexual activists are American terrorists, and their target is any Christian business, church, or Christian politician. They are out to destroy even the Constitutional protections that are the First Amendment. Make no mistake. And I will fight this with all that is within me.
Let's assume homosexuality is a choice. Religion is a choice as well. So, by your logic, people should be free to discriminate against Catholics, for example.
Religion may be a choice, and it is (many people choose not to believe God), but it is not a behavior.
There is no protection in the Constitution that protects atheism, since atheism is not a religion (I don't care what Bill O'Reilly says).
The Founders had very good and specific reasons for the First Amendment's so-called "Establishment Clause" and the "Free Exercise Clause." They were familiar with religious persecution. It is what drove many (if not most) to the "New World."
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.
Do you seriously think that is a valid analogy and argument. If so, you don't understand the issue at all.
