This Is The Most Important Religious Liberty Decision Since Masterpiece Cakeshop

[bèlla]

Is there a third option for the business owner being taken to court? Or for the person in your original, supposed dichotomous scenario? If so, then please share with us.

That is not the option. It is the effect of the other. They are taken to court due to their refusal. It is the consequence of their decision.

 

[AACJ]

If you are working in the legal space to affect change, with a nonprofit group, or built a digital platform to address the issue the long-term benefits would exceed forum debates.

Probably so. Good advice.

 

[bèlla]

Probably so. Good advice.

Do you want to know why truthfully?

 

[AACJ]

That is not the option. It is the effect of the other. They are taken to court due to their refusal. It is the consequence of their decision.

What? Come on, dear Christian. They are not taken to court because of general refusal.

 

[AACJ]

Do you want to know why truthfully?

Yes, thank you.

 

[bèlla]

The legal wrangling is a ruse. They expected them to take the bait. Christ told us to be wise as serpents for a reason. It was a catch-22 from the start.

How did a small group gain so much power? Works of darkness are active and well organized. They aren’t discussing things. They’re putting plans in motion.

Christians spend a lot of time complaining and little effecting change. That catches up with you after a while. If everyone worked on behalf of the issues in their complaints we’d see a different picture.

 

[GACfan]

That is not the option. It is the effect of the other. They are taken to court due to their refusal. It is the consequence of their decision.

Yes, there can be legal consequences for a Christian who chooses to discriminate against a gay couple or perhaps against anyone else the Christian apparently feels shouldn't have civil rights and equality.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yes, there can be legal consequences for a person who chooses to discriminate against a gay couple or perhaps against anyone else the person apparently feels shouldn't have civil rights and equality.

Christians feel that their civil rights under the first amendment should be respected. Why is that a problem? I don't see any Christians here complaining about having the freedom to choose.

 

[GACfan]

Christians feel that their civil rights under the first amendment should be respected. Why is that a problem? I don't see any Christians here complaining about having the freedom to choose.

It's a problem because of anti-discrimination laws. It's a problem because Christians aren't above the law. Christians shouldn't be allowed to violate anti-discrimination laws while other American citizens are legally forced to obey these laws. It's a problem because LGBT American citizens shouldn't have to deal with religious based prejudice and discrimination just as African-American citizens (and other minority American citizens) shouldn't have to deal with racially based bigotry and discrimination.

If a Christian is allowed to discriminate against a same-sex couple, then that could open the door to more of this: Mississippi wedding venue refuses to rent to engaged interracial couple because the owners say 'it's against our Christian beliefs to do mixed race and gay weddings' and I don't want to the United States of America to begin reverting back to the era before the Civil Rights Movement.

If a Christian feels that he or she can't fully serve homosexuals in their public business because they feel it would violate their conscience (while they willingly serve many other sinners), then they need to find another place of employment and humbly remove themselves from the public eye.

Gay American citizens, as well as other LGBT American citizens, should have the same civil rights and equality as straight American citizens. Gay and other LGBT American citizens should not be denied civil rights and encounter religious based discrimination because some Christian or some other person of faith doesn't agree with the sexual lifestyle of that gay person or other LGBT person.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of a person who has been divorced and remarried multiple times, but I wouldn't refuse to serve that person or their current spouse if I owned a public business.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of a straight couple who is living together in daily sin before they are married, but I wouldn't refuse to serve that couple if I owned a public business.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of someone that I know to be an habitually liar (lying is also an abomination to God), but I wouldn't refuse to serve that person if I owned a public business.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of a person who is obese and grossly overweight (gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins), but I wouldn't refuse to serve that person if I owned a public business.

As a Christian, I wouldn't single out certain sinners and refuse them service while I willingly served every other sinner under the sun with no moral confliction whatsoever if I owned a public business.

 

[Aldebaran]

It's a problem because of anti-discrimination laws. It's a problem because Christians aren't above the law. Christians shouldn't be allowed to violate anti-discrimination laws while other American citizens are legally forced to obey these laws. It's a problem because LGBT American citizens shouldn't have to deal with religious based prejudice and discrimination just as African-American citizens (and other minority American citizens) shouldn't have to deal with racially based bigotry and discrimination.

If a Christian is allowed to discriminate against a same-sex couple, then that could open the door to more of this: Mississippi wedding venue refuses to rent to engaged interracial couple because the owners say 'it's against our Christian beliefs to do mixed race and gay weddings' and I don't want to the United States of America begin to revert back to the era before the Civil Rights Movement.

If a Christian feels that he or she can't fully serve homosexuals in their public business because they feel it would violate their conscience (while they willingly serve many other sinners), then they need to find another place of employment and humbly remove themselves from the public eye.

Gay American citizens, as well as other LGBT American citizens, should have the same civil rights and equality as straight American citizens. Gay and other LGBT American citizens should not be denied civil rights and encounter religious based discrimination because some Christian or other person of faith doesn't agree with the sexual lifestyle of that gay person or other LGBT person.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of a person who has been divorced and remarried multiple times, but I wouldn't refuse to serve that person or their current spouse if I owned a public business.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of a couple who is living together in daily sin before they are married, but I wouldn't refuse to serve that couple if I owned a public business.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of someone that I know to be an habitually liar (lying is also an abomination to God), but I wouldn't refuse to serve that person if I owned a public business.

I don't personally agree with the lifestyle of a person who is obese and grossly overweight (gluttony is a sin), but I wouldn't refuse to serve that person if I owned a public business.

As a Christian, I wouldn't single out certain sinners and refuse them service while I willingly served every other kind of sinner under the sun with no moral confliction whatsoever if I owned a public business.

I guess it all depends on what you can do in good conscience. However, there are some who have beliefs that may not line up with changing laws, and they shouldn't either be denied the ability to make a living, or be forced to violate their conscience.

 

[GACfan]

I guess it all depends on what you can do in good conscience. However, there are some who have beliefs that may not line up with changing laws, and they shouldn't either be denied the ability to make a living, or be forced to violate their conscience.

Like I said...

If a Christian feels that he or she can't fully serve homosexuals in their public business because they feel it would violate their conscience (while they willingly serve many other sinners), then they need to find another place of employment and humbly remove themselves from the public eye.

 

[Aldebaran]

Like I said...

If a Christian feels that he or she can't fully serve homosexuals in their public business because they feel it would violate their conscience (while they willingly serve many other sinners), then they need to find another place of employment and humbly remove themselves from the public eye.

If that's what they "need" to do, then their religious freedom is certainly not being respected. Thankfully, as the OP has shown, there may still be hope that people will be allowed to run their business their own way.

 

[GACfan]

If that's what they "need" to do, then their religious freedom is certainly not being respected.

If a same-sex couple is being discriminated against by a Christian because that Christian feels it would violate their conscience to serve the couple (despite the fact they apparently have no moral conflict while serving other sinners), then the civil rights of that couple aren't being respected, and the law is being discarded. There are anti-discrimination laws for a reason and Christians aren't above the law.

 

[GACfan]

If that's what they "need" to do, then their religious freedom is certainly not being respected. Thankfully, as the OP has shown, there may still be hope that people will be allowed to run their business their own way.

People should be allowed to run their business their way with no legal restrictions whatsoever, such as anti-discrimination laws or even zoning laws? I'm glad that there are laws to protect marginalized and disparaged groups of people from discrimination and other laws to regulate public businesses.

 

[AACJ]

Yes, there can be legal consequences for a Christian who chooses to discriminate against a gay couple or perhaps against anyone else the Christian apparently feels shouldn't have civil rights and equality.

As if truth is a matter of opinion?

First of all, there is no consideration for the category of "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" in the US constitution.

Secondly, you really should not so misrepresent genuine, God-fearing Christians. The Christian business owners are not discriminating against persons, rather, they are discriminating against certain godless beliefs and practices, which is something every Christian should support. Everyone discriminates between right and wrong everyday, as a duty and necessity.

 

[JackRT]

If that's what they "need" to do, then their religious freedom is certainly not being respected. Thankfully, as the OP has shown, there may still be hope that people will be allowed to run their business their own way.

By humiliating and insulting other people who deserve to be treated with the same respect that you apparently reserve for only certain people in spite of the fact that you are in a business to serve all people.

 

[AACJ]

If a same-sex couple is being discriminated against by a Christian because that Christian feels it would violate their conscience to serve the couple (despite the fact they apparently have no moral conflict while serving other sinners), then the civil rights of that couple aren't being respected, and the law is being discarded. There are anti-discrimination laws for a reason and Christians aren't above the law.

You have introduced straw-man statements.

Certain states laws are in violation of the civil and God-given rights of small business owners because of misinterpreting Title VI. The "sexual orientation" argument put forth in some state civil right laws are unjustified. They are bogus, and and have no moral justification. Without moral justification, laws are arbitrary and promote governmental tyranny.

 

[AACJ]

This issue will apparently be settled soon in SCOTUS. All of you Bible-believing, praying Christians had better put this on your prayer list. No joke.

Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia - SCOTUSblog

Symposium: How the Title VII trilogy may test the court - SCOTUSblog


Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating against an individual “because of such individual’s … sex.” The question presented in these three cases is whether this language also prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

 

[GACfan]

As if truth is a matter of opinion?

First of all, there is no consideration for the category of "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" in the US constitution.

There are anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT American citizens from discrimination and from being harassed, such as: Federal court rules that anti-discrimination laws protect LGBT workers.

Secondly, you really should not so misrepresent genuine, God-fearing Christians. The Christian business owners are not discriminating against persons, rather, they are discriminating against certain godless beliefs and practices, which is something every Christian should support. Everyone discriminates between right and wrong everyday, as a duty and necessity.

If a Christian were to honestly "discriminate against" certain godless beliefs and practices, then that Christian wouldn't be able to associate with any other person alive because all people, Christians and non-Christians alike, are sinners who fall short of the glory of God. A Christian like that might as well lock themselves away in a secluded room for the rest of their lives and never come into contact with another person again because that person could be guilty of godless beliefs and practices.

 

[GACfan]

By humiliating and insulting other people who deserve to be treated with the same respect that you apparently reserve for only certain people in spite of the fact that you are in a business to serve all people.

And none of these Christian business owners who discriminate against homosexuals due to their claim of violating their conscience have the slightest inclination of moral confliction serving other sinners.