resolution filed in Tennessee to avoid Gods Judgement on gay marriage

[Armoured]

Not all the corporations in Germany were tied to the military.

Nme three that weren't.

 

[William67]

I'm a Christian. I don't see the part in our teachings where discriminating against homosexuals is a requirement. I do see the parts about being a good citizen and obeying temporal authority.

Either way, tapdance as much as you like, they weren't sued for "being Christian" as claimed. The were prosecuted for illegal discrimination.

Matthew 10:14-15
14"Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.
15"Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city.

 

[Armoured]

Your post reminds me that the early Christians were fed to the lions because they were bad Roman citizens not because they were Christians.

That's funny, because your posts remind me of people like Torquemada who were "just doing God's work".

 

[Armoured]

Matthew 10:14-15
14"Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.
15"Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city.

The random, uncommentated Bible verse is cute, but doesn't appear to have anything to do with the question. It was the alleged Christians who were refusing to receive the gays, not the other way around.

 

[ken777]

Again, no one was sued. The couple filed a complaint against the business, Elaine's Photography.

Christian businesses have been taken to court as a direct result of complaints made by disgruntled homosexual customers who could have respected the religious beliefs of the owners but instead chose to see how much money they could get out of them.

It is also worth noting that the quote you are using is from the dissenting opinion. For that matter, the quote isn't even true, they are merely compelled to obey the law. If they cannot, in good conscience, obey the law with their current business then they are free to change the business, so they do not need to compromise their beliefs. This is no different than any other person attempting to follow their religion in the business world.

So you think Justice Bosson is not telling the truth ... ok.

No, it has nothing to do with being a Christian since the law does not only effect Christians. It would be like a gay business owner complaining of being discriminated for being gay because he is required to serve Christians in his business (which the law also requires). The law states you must serve all customers equally, at least based on protected classes; if you cannot serve all people equally, than you likely need to change your business model or find another line of work.

Your comparison fails because no Christian business owner who has been "sued" (split hairs if you like) has refused to provide service to homosexuals. They have only refused to participate in a sinful activity.

 

[Maren]

That's funny, since just days after the ruling a guy called around to "gay" bakeries and was refused service when he wanted a cake that espoused that homosexuality was a sin. Maybe he should have filed a complaint and got the law after them for discrimination.

Actually, at least one guy did file a discrimination complaint -- though interestingly this Christian filed it against a bakery owned by a Christian. In this case, the baker agreed to bake them the cake and even provide the frosting for the message, he just refused to write the message.

In this case, they ruled for the bakery because they agreed to bake the cake -- they followed the law. The bakery is merely required to provide whatever product or service they would provide for any other customer. Since they wouldn't put any type of anti-gay saying (or allegedly any discriminatory saying) on a cake for any person, they are not denying a service that they provide.

 

[Goonie]

The only industries who supported them were businesses who produced war materials. And the Duke of Windsor's support was his own. He didn't make national policy for the UK.

As I said a substantial portion of the British aristocracy, the right wing media such as the Dail mail, and throughout Europe it was the far right who supported Hitler, Franco for example.

Hitler was supported by big business, not by just a few, one of his first acts was to abolish the trade unions in may of 1933, their leaders arrested and sent to prison. This was at once aimed at crushing socialism, and communism that Hitler detested, and in gaining support from business in removing the right to strike and ensuring wage stability.

 

[ken777]

That's funny, because your posts remind me of people like Torquemada who were "just doing God's work".

My comparison was meant to explain the distinction between the person and his/her behavior more clearly. Yours is just meant be personally insulting. Very disappointed.

 

[Armoured]

My comparison was meant to explain the distinction between the person and his/her behavior more clearly. Yours is just meant be personally insulting. Very disappointed.

Translation "it's OK when I do it, it's not OK when you do it."

 

[Larniavc]

Not according to the bible.

The thing is tht you get to live be those rules. But you cannot expect other people to do the same.

 

[Maren]

Christian businesses have been taken to court as a direct result of complaints made by disgruntled homosexual customers who could have respected the religious beliefs of the owners but instead chose to see how much money they could get out of them.

No, they aren't actually taken to court. Most of the court cases, as I recall, have been appeals by the baker/photographer of the ruling of the department of their state that handles discrimination complaints. In most cases there has been no fine -- in fact, in most states there is no monetary penalty for a business merely for discriminating; as such it can't be a "money grab" by the gay couples.

I do find it ironic, though, that many of the same Christians that complained to businesses, threatening boycotts, merely because cashiers do not say "Merry Christmas" (rather than simply shopping elsewhere) are complaining about gay couples who are upset at a business that is violating the law.

So you think Justice Bosson is not telling the truth ... ok.

So's Law. Please address what I say, not a straw man.

Your comparison fails because no Christian business owner who has been "sued" (split hairs if you like) has refused to provide service to homosexuals. They have only refused to participate in a sinful activity.

This goes back to a saying by another justice, Justice Scalia, who stated "A tax on wearing yarmulkes is a tax on Jews." To use that in this case, if you make a wedding cake for anyone except gays, but won't for gays, you are discriminating against gays. Again, the law requires that if you sell a product or service, you must sell it to any customers -- you cannot deny a product or service you sell to a customer based on a protected class that customer belongs to.

If a business owner cannot in good conscience offer a product to all customers, then he should not offer that product. My understanding is that the Colorado Bakery, that refused the wedding cake for a gay couple, has done this. They still make cakes for most other occasions but no longer make them for weddings.

 

[ken777]

Translation "it's OK when I do it, it's not OK when you do it."

My reference was to Christians executed because they broke Roman law, not because they were Christians. For much of the pagan Roman period Christianity was tolerated, but the Christians were required to fulfill the duties of Roman law. When they could not in good conscience do this, they were persecuted. Fortunately the penalty is not so severe today but the principle is the same.
I do not doubt you are a Catholic Christian but clearly you do not understand the Evangelical or Biblical Christian faith.

 

[Armoured]

My reference was to Christians executed because they broke Roman law, not because they were Christians. For much of the pagan Roman period Christianity was tolerated, but the Christians were required to fulfill the duties of Roman law. When they could not in good conscience do this, they were persecuted. Fortunately the penalty is not so severe today but the principle is the same.
I do not doubt you are a Catholic Christian but clearly you do not understand the Evangelical or Biblical Christian faith.

And Torquemada had Jews killed for merely following their religion, despite the edicts of the secular power. Seems pretty comparable to me.

 

[dysert]

The problem is that the more sin that exists throughout the country, the worse the whole country is. So it's not just about me; it's about all of us. Abortion doesn't just affect the little family affected, its cumulative effect is bestowed upon the whole country. Similarly, redefining marriage doesn't just affect the couple getting "married", its effect ripples through society. All sin permeates the land, just like a little leaven affects the whole loaf.

Uh-huh. So how does gay marriage affect anyone but the gay couples getting married?

I mean, specifically?

I don't know how I can state it any more clearly. A little leaven affects the whole loaf. If someone is living in a state of sin, that's a bad thing not only for them but it drags down the whole country on a spiritual level. That's why so many of us are concerned that the country has been descending morally for quite some time now. Sin not only affects the person doing it, but it has a spiritual impact on those around him/her. (I don't think the spiritual impact can be measured by objective means, so don't ask for a study.)

 

[ken777]

No, they aren't actually taken to court. Most of the court cases, as I recall, have been appeals by the baker/photographer of the ruling of the department of their state that handles discrimination complaints. In most cases there has been no fine -- in fact, in most states there is no monetary penalty for a business merely for discriminating; as such it can't be a "money grab" by the gay couples.

I do find it ironic, though, that many of the same Christians that complained to businesses, threatening boycotts, merely because cashiers do not say "Merry Christmas" (rather than simply shopping elsewhere) are complaining about gay couples who are upset at a business that is violating the law.



So's Law. Please address what I say, not a straw man.



This goes back to a saying by another justice, Justice Scalia, who stated "A tax on wearing yarmulkes is a tax on Jews." To use that in this case, if you make a wedding cake for anyone except gays, but won't for gays, you are discriminating against gays. Again, the law requires that if you sell a product or service, you must sell it to any customers -- you cannot deny a product or service you sell to a customer based on a protected class that customer belongs to.

If a business owner cannot in good conscience offer a product to all customers, then he should not offer that product. My understanding is that the Colorado Bakery, that refused the wedding cake for a gay couple, has done this. They still make cakes for most other occasions but no longer make them for weddings.

In reference to Justice Bosson's comments you said "the quote isn't even true". In fact, it is very true and is being acted out in our society today. The Huguenins, Justice Bosson wrote "now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives."
The legal penalties being imposed on Christians who refuse to "bow to Caesar" are a direct result of disgruntled homosexuals who do not respect traditional Christian beliefs.

 

[Armoured]

I don't know how I can state it any more clearly. A little leaven affects the whole loaf. If someone is living in a state of sin, that's a bad thing not only for them but it drags down the whole country on a spiritual level. That's why so many of us are concerned that the country has been descending morally for quite some time now. Sin not only affects the person doing it, but it has a spiritual impact on those around him/her. (I don't think the spiritual impact can be measured by objective means, so don't ask for a study.)

Well, if the negative impact can't be measured objectively, how do you know it's happening?

 

[Armoured]

The legal penalties being imposed on Christians who refuse to "bow to Caesar" are a direct result of disgruntled homosexuals who do not respect traditional Christian beliefs.

Being free to refuse business to homosexuals is a "traditional Christian belief"?

Chapter and verse?

 

[ken777]

I don't know how I can state it any more clearly. A little leaven affects the whole loaf. If someone is living in a state of sin, that's a bad thing not only for them but it drags down the whole country on a spiritual level. That's why so many of us are concerned that the country has been descending morally for quite some time now. Sin not only affects the person doing it, but it has a spiritual impact on those around him/her. (I don't think the spiritual impact can be measured by objective means, so don't ask for a study.)

Your post would be understood & appreciated by those with a concern for the spiritual welfare of the nation.

 

[ken777]

Being free to refuse business to homosexuals is a "traditional Christian belief"?

Chapter and verse?

Ephesians 5:11

No Christian business I know of has refused service to homosexuals - they have only declined to provide service for a sinful activity.

 

[Armoured]

DP