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.
Well, let's see now. You can call anything you want "discrimination," but unless you get a LAWYER to argue it in a court of law--your opinion is nothing but a pile of bovine excrement. Even when the tide of public opinion about gay people began to change, it was and CONTINUES to be a battle of lawyers on the state level now that it has been determined at a federal level.
I would think in your line of work lawyers are a must have, because no matter what you think is reasonable or fair, you aren't the one deciding it when it involves the public eye. You need lawyers.
I don't need to worry about Saudi lawyers because Saudis determine their own idea of "discrimination," for people in their country--or maybe they do, because I know so little of their system it may simply be an edict by the King.
But in this country discrimination doesn't exist without attorneys being involved. If you think that is not so, then march down the street naked because in YOUR opinion it is discriminatory to arrest you. Here in Colorado---in Boulder, I think, a group of women battled to "bare the nipple" because men could go topless but women cannot. They lost--because LAWYERS argued that it was NOT discriminatory and the view of lawyers won out over the OPINIONS of some citizens.
Again...by your logic...holding slaves (or anything else of that nature) is only discrimination against them if lawyers say so. Thus...anywhere slavery was/is legal, there is no "Real" discrimination against them.
To you..."Lawyers" and "The Law" are the ultimate arbiter, and there is no other.
Of course.. a basic assessment of this view makes it self-evident how faulty it is.
"Lawyers" and "The Law" only determine what will be considered "criminal" discrimination, in whatever jurisdiction. They do not determine what "Real" discrimination is.
It's weird that Jesus never really felt the need to set the record straight, isn't it? I mean...he COULD have cleared up all the misunderstandings and endorsed same sex marriage.
But he didn't. In fact, he reiterated that male/female marriage as it was with Adam and Eve was GOOD.
Weird, huh?
Oh, I guess there aren't gay Christians?
How does this change what I said? It's a matter of fact that gay Christians exist. I've met some. I personally don't give a crap what ChristianMingle does. It's a redundant waste of a website to be honest. Most other dating sites, to my knowledge, allow you to look for people who share your religion. However, ChristianMingle presents itself as a place where Christians can meet other Christians. Excluding gay Christians sort of pokes a whole in that. Correct?
Again...by your logic...holding slaves (or anything else of that nature) is only discrimination against them if lawyers say so. Thus...anywhere slavery was/is legal, there is no "Real" discrimination against them.
To you..."Lawyers" and "The Law" are the ultimate arbiter, and there is no other.
Of course.. a basic assessment of this view makes it self-evident how faulty it is.
"Lawyers" and "The Law" only determine what will be considered "criminal" discrimination, in whatever jurisdiction. They do not determine what "Real" discrimination is.
Why do you thik slaves had to escape to the North? because in the South the Law left them nowhere else to run to. In the North, why were they then Free? because the law there said so. The Law does not always determine what's right or wrong but it is still the law.
Again...by your logic...holding slaves (or anything else of that nature) is only discrimination against them if lawyers say so. Thus...anywhere slavery was/is legal, there is no "Real" discrimination against them.
To you..."Lawyers" and "The Law" are the ultimate arbiter, and there is no other.
Of course.. a basic assessment of this view makes it self-evident how faulty it is.
"Lawyers" and "The Law" only determine what will be considered "criminal" discrimination, in whatever jurisdiction. They do not determine what "Real" discrimination is.
Holding slaves was perfectly legal AND non-discriminatory for decades in the US of A. You are mixing up morality with discrimination. It may be immoral but it is only discriminatory if so determined by some group, that is almost always heavily influenced by lawyers, passes a law or takes the item to court. The LAW didn't change with regard to slavery until the Emancipation Proclamation issued by Lincoln---a lawyer.
In 1860, holding slaves was not discriminatory nor illegal. It certainly was immoral. ChristianMingle was discriminatory in what they did---and lawyers decided that. Whether or not it is immoral is a different question.
That was the message of Scripture. While LAW stated certain things were "legal" or "undiscriminatory" under the Jewish system existing, Jesus declared the law was immoral. Getting it out of the idea of discrimination and into the realm of morality lends a completely different picture. What is discriminatory is determined by law--what is moral is in the eyes of the beholder.
How does this change what I said? It's a matter of fact that gay Christians exist. I've met some. I personally don't give a crap what ChristianMingle does. It's a redundant waste of a website to be honest. Most other dating sites, to my knowledge, allow you to look for people who share your religion. However, ChristianMingle presents itself as a place where Christians can meet other Christians. Excluding gay Christians sort of pokes a whole in that. Correct?
It's worse than that. Seventy percent of Americans identify as being "christian," but not even the fundamentalists recognize that number of people as being truly christian. So what did it take to get into ChristianMingle--a statement that one is a christian???? As easy as eating a slice of apple pie.
The problem with fundamentalism is that they have so dumbed down the idea of being a follower of Christ to saying "I believe in Jesus," that any Isis terrorist could be a member--because Muslims DO believe in Jesus as another prophet.
Quote:
Jesus is believed to be a prophet, who neither married nor had any children, and is reflected as a significant figure, being mentioned in the Quran in 93 ayaat (Arabic for verses) with various titles attached such as "Son of Mary", "Spirit of God", and the "Word of God" among other relational terms, directly and indirectly, over 180 times.
The site, like most fundamentalists, is a "pretend" christian site. They have no way of recognizing a Christ follower. In fact fundamentalism has so dumbed down the meaning of being a follower that it has turned into being a social convention rather than a commitment to treating others as Jesus treated them.
And ChristianMingle has stupid, really stupid directors. This kind of crap isn't even new. Way back in 2007 another dating website received similar treatment:
Quote:
[David Bernstein, May 31, 2007 at 10:55pm] Trackbacks
Eharmony Sue for Sexual Orientation Discrimination: Eharmony.com, the most profitable on-line dating service, is being sued under California law for discrimination based on sexual orientation for failing to include "women seeking women" or "men seeking men" categories on its website. Eharmony, for its part, claims that its services are based on research regarding what makes heterosexuals compatible, and because it has no similar research available for homosexuals, it does not provide services to them. Complicating matters is the fact that Eharmony's founder is an evangelical Christian with apparent ties to Focus on the Family.
Incidentally, the author of the above website argued AGAINST the lawsuit on sexual orientation discrimination stating that it trivializes anti-discriminatory legislation. On that point he may have been correct. But that isn't what is being argued on this thread.
Holding slaves was perfectly legal AND non-discriminatory for decades in the US of A. You are mixing up morality with discrimination. It may be immoral but it is only discriminatory if so determined by some group, that is almost always heavily influenced by lawyers, passes a law or takes the item to court. The LAW didn't change with regard to slavery until the Emancipation Proclamation issued by Lincoln---a lawyer.
In 1860, holding slaves was not discriminatory nor illegal. It certainly was immoral. ChristianMingle was discriminatory in what they did---and lawyers decided that. Whether or not it is immoral is a different question.
That was the message of Scripture. While LAW stated certain things were "legal" or "undiscriminatory" under the Jewish system existing, Jesus declared the law was immoral. Getting it out of the idea of discrimination and into the realm of morality lends a completely different picture. What is discriminatory is determined by law--what is moral is in the eyes of the beholder.
Where you are messing up, is erroneously thinking that "discrimination" is a term predicated on criminality...that an act must be "against the law" in the jurisdiction where it occurrs to be designated such.
Like "murder". All "murder" is "killing"...but not all "killing" is "murder". "Murder" denotes killing that is criminal in nature. The term is a "legal" reference.
Here, check this out: Discrimination | Definition of Discrimination by Merriam-Webster
Notice...the Law, opinions of lawyers, and criminality has NOTHING to do with it...let alone, as you say, is the whole basis.
Legal or illegal...if an act fits that definition...it is "real" discrimination.
Enslaving people is ALWAYS discriminatory, but has (unfortunately) not always necessarily been criminal.
It seems you are confused. The definition tells us nothing about the morality. Ethical discussion tells us that, and the law is what puts force behind the outcome of that discussion. In that sense, it does decide what is and what is not criminal discrimination.
It seems you are confused. The definition tells us nothing about the morality. Ethical discussion tells us that, and the law is what puts force behind the outcome of that discussion. In that sense, it does decide what is and what is not criminal discrimination.
I'm not confused at all.
The definition tells us what "real" discrimination is...which was the initial issue I addressed.
The law and lawyers have nothing to do with it beyond their own criminal code. Discriminatory acts may or may not be illegal. That doesn't change what is definitively "discrimination". It is that, regardless.
Not a legit argument. They offer a site for the purpose of acquiring dates. Their "product" is not the site per se...the "product" is to acquire contact with others to date. That is why it is defined as a "Dating Site".
It is analogous to saying the Israeli meat market owners must carry non-kosher products for those that are not Jewish...on the basis: What they offer is a butcher shop.
This is ridiculous, their "product" is the site, just like a hair salon's product IS the stuff they are selling (and money changers do) in their salon. Their "service" is helping people meet up (if even just virtually), just like a hair salon's service is to provide hair products (and a roof) and cuts.
Again, has ANYONE stopped to think and research and question and tell me if Oral Roberts University has to accept gays officially? The answer is No, because they don't rely on government money. ChristianMingle seems to rely on Government and THUS must follow government laws related to funds, etc. Their primary motivation is money just like most desperate capitalists who merely shroud themselves in Religion so that they can sleep at night or have a simple and entertaining structure to their lives, mind you I say most, some capitalists see a niche market to capitalize on in the very stubborn and strict religious peoples (Oral Roberts U).
Why would gays want to be on this website? To cause trouble, no other reason. They have their own dating websites, but some just want to cause trouble.
There's multiple gay Christian dating web sites? How many active members do each of them have?
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.
