Ministers threatened with jail and thousands in fines for refusing to marry gays

[YeShallTread]

He's silent. Guess we're on our own.

Because you can't see or hear doesn't mean He is silent.

Deuteronomy 29:4 Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.​

Until then you are on your own.

 

[elliott95]

Because you can't see or hear doesn't mean He is silent.

Deuteronomy 29:4 Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.​

Until then you are on your own.

The world is charged with the grandeur of God

 

[TLK Valentine]

Because you can't see or hear doesn't mean He is silent.

Deuteronomy 29:4 Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.​

Until then you are on your own.

I thought you just said to listen to God, not men? Now all you're doing is quoting a book...

 

[YeShallTread]

I thought you just said to listen to God, not men? Now all you're doing is quoting a book...

Quoting the Book is the best thing I can do for you TLK.

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me.

Hebrews 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of Me,) to do thy will, O God.​

 

[TLK Valentine]

Quoting the Book is the best thing I can do for you TLK.

Well, if I'm not supposed to listen to people, I'm certainly not going to listen to books written by people, or people who insist that said book was written by God.

So I guess we really are on our own on this one.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Well, if I'm not supposed to listen to people, I'm certainly not going to listen to books written by people, or people who insist that said book was written by God.

So I guess we really are on our own on this one.

Unless you get called perhaps.

And the LORD said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows; And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites. Now therefore, behold, the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me: and I have also seen the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them.

Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt. And Moses said unto God, Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt? And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.

And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them? And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations. Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt: And I have said, I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt unto the land of the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, unto a land flowing with milk and honey.​

 

[TLK Valentine]

Unless you get called perhaps.

...followed by an excessively long quote from the same book.

 

[NightHawkeye]

...followed by an excessively long quote from the same book.

You're on your own in regard to reading. I offered.

 

[YeShallTread]

You're on your own in regard to reading. I offered.

Ezekiel 2:6-7 And thou, son of man, be not afraid of them, neither be afraid of their words, though briers and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions: be not afraid of their words, nor be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house. And thou shalt speak My words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.

 

[Queller]

deleted

 

[Queller]

Absolutely nothing of course. Since the 60s, interracial marriage has been legal throughout the US. Yet, the government has not tried to force a church to perform a interracial wedding ceremony. Divorce has been legal in the US for a very long time, and no government has tried to force churches such as the Catholic church to perform a wedding ceremony between a couple where at least one has been divorced and not had their previous marriage annulled.

Why people think that make same sex marriages legal will suddenly mean governments in the US will force individual churches to perform same sex weddings is beyond me.

Because some people will use any excuse, no matter how flimsy, to run around like Chicken Little.

 

[Queller]

The law here guarantees the free exercise of religion

Which is restricted when it comes to places of public accommodation.

You do know that all freedoms in the Bill of Rights are subject to restrictions, right?

 

[Queller]

Lol. No, you were portraying yourself as taking the "high road" but in fact chose not to take the "high road" while simultaneously recommending me to take the "high ride."

Nowhere did I portray myself as taking the high road. I stated very clearly that I was responding to you in kind.

A reasonable person is going to understand it takes a "person" to comply with public accommodation law.

Very true, but it doesn't have to be the ministers in question does it? Yes or no?

In other words, a reasonable person isn't going to read and understand a public accommodation law will require a lifeless, brick and mortar building to not discriminate but rather a person, a flesh and blood human being, with human DNA, is going to comply with the public accommodation law.

Very true, but it doesn't have to be the ministers in question does it? Yes or no?

I award you no points for making an irrelevant and unnecessary remark about Volokh, especially since you have labored tirelessly you couldn't care less of his position, although his legal exposition is in fact relevant for me but not for you. Nice!

I'm glad that it's relevant to you. My point was that it wasn't relevant to the Hitching Post or the city of Coeur d'Alene.

You seem to be quite invested in Volokh's opinion. Do you work for him?

 

[Queller]

Missing the point quite deliberately I see.

 

[Queller]

God was specific enough...have ye not read?

I've read the entirety of Romans 1 which is why I asked you to be more specific. If you can't do that, so be it.

Ah, the chapter where Jesus is speaking to the wicked hypocrites. LOL The hypocrites trying, as some do here, to turn things upside down...good for bad and bad for good. Trying to place government over God. That is what you are "partial" to as are many liberals. I'm surprised you so easily confess this.

Nothing to confess. Did Jesus mean that only unbelievers and hypocrites were to follow the laws of the government?

Matthew 22:18-22 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye Me, ye hypocrites? Shew Me the tribute money. And they brought unto Him a penny. And He saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? They say unto Him, Caesar's. Then saith He unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left Him, and went their way.​

What is Caesar's? What holds his image?

Secular law and government.

Matthew 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.​

As man cannot "serve God and mammon," what then is the moral of the above story?

Those serving mammon "left Him and went their way" because their way is not His way. When Caesar/government requires money/taxes, etc. then it must be paid. When God speaks then we render unto Him the things that are His. He is The Master we serve. His Word, not Caesar's changing ways and rules, are the things that are God's.

On this present topic...God has spoken and the government cannot change truth no matter how much it wants to be a flaming rainbow of color.

Since the government is not of God (and is specifically designed to be that way) I don't see you point.

I think homosexual practices and approval of such practices should be overturned...don't you?

No, I do not believe it is the government's job to get involved in the private lives of consenting adults.

God's judgement will do just fine.

BTW, I'm quite confused by your apparent hypocrisy. Here you state that it is their choice who to marry and Christians don't interfer in other people choice of marital partner;

No. It is their choice. It is also the choice of the man marrying those in his chapel to marry homosexuals or not.

Christians don't force others to marry or not marry. Everyone buys their own ticket to heaven or hell.

and here you state that even though you and God disapprove, they should go ahead and get married.

They shouldn't. As I said, we all purchase our tickets to heaven or hell...including the "pastors." ( sorry, I have to laugh as I see them actually use that title). If they want to marry them then have at it. The idea of them standing at an altar in a church of God while doing so is a huge part of the abomination. And, "God will not be mocked."

But then above you say that

"I think homosexual practices and approval of such practices should be overturned"

How do you resolve that dichotomy? Or do you not see it as a dichotomy?

[snip]

HAHAHAHA. Jesse Jackson...what a joke! No more than a liberal has-been trying to gain more votes. That pretty much sums up the rest of your quotes...jokes, liberal jokes.

Coretta Scott King, Mildred Loving, and Julian Bond are liberal jokes?

I notice the only way you can address my quotes that directly refute your claims is through pathetic ad hominem attacks. Doesn't say much for your argument does it?

Please provide the quotes and we can discuss them.

The quotes about what? The Bible condoning slavery? Sure;

Leviticus 25:44-46

Exodus 21:20-21

Ephesians 6:5

Colossians 4:1

Exodus 21:1-36

Exodus 21:7-11

There are lots more. If you want to discuss it however, start a new thread and I will join you.

 

[Queller]

The only rights being violated are those of the men being forced or fined to marry homosexual couples.

Good thing that isn't happening, isn't it?

 

[Queller]

The point is that your right to the free exercise of religion extends to your business operations, per the Constitution

Cite the portion of the Constitution that states unequivocally that "free exercise of religion extends to your business operations".

 

[Queller]

It really depends on the circumstance, but in this case the answer is yes.

We have a 1st Amendment for a reason, you see the pilgrims left England due to persecution based on religion. The 1st Amendment is there to prevent government from persecuting people based on their religious beliefs.

If a person holds the religious belief that homosexuals should be allowed to marry and wishes to conduct the ceremony, should the government prevent him from doing so and refuse to recognize the marriage as legal?

There are Christian denominations that wish to perform SSMs but are prevented by the state from doing so. Pastors in those denomination are in fact in danger of fines or jail time if they perform a same-sex wedding ceremony.

What is your opinion on the state persecuting those Christians based on their religious beliefs?

 

[Queller]

It seems that the lawyers and the local politicians in this instance disagree ... seeing as how they reached agreement that the ordinance and penalties don't apply ... at least not as originally written.

Actually, as originally written, the ordinance in question (read it here) contained a specific exception to the ordinance for religious corporations. When the Hitching Post restructured on 12 October 2014 to become a religious organization, they automatically fell under the existing exception to the law.

 

[Queller]

Judges are fallible, subject to their own prejudice

But the ones who agree with you aren't the fallible ones, right?