What's a good response to the equating of catering same sex weddings with Jim Crow laws?

Jackson Cooper · Jul 11, 2018

Probably the most common argument used by those in favour of making it illegal for a bakery to refuse catering a same sex wedding is as follows:
Refusing to cater a gay wedding is like refusing to give service to a black person.

I would think the problem with this logic is that a same sex marriage is a physical act. It would be possible to sell a cake to a homosexual without having to write a message the cake decorator disagrees with. It would be similar to refusing to write 'KKK' on a cake or to print out shirts with a message the business disagrees with.

It's not whether or not a business is required to give service to homosexuals, but rather whether or not a business is required to endorse an act or organization.

Does this all logically hold up?

yeshuaslavejeff · Jul 11, 2018

From the title question,
the best response may be
no response at all -
silence.

The battle is Yahweh's ,
so perhaps as He Says "Be Still, and Know that I AM Sovereign Elohim" ....

cfyahoo08 · Jul 11, 2018

Jackson Cooper said:
Probably the most common argument used by those in favour of making it illegal for a bakery to refuse catering a same sex wedding is as follows:
Refusing to cater a gay wedding is like refusing to give service to a black person.

I would think the problem with this logic is that a same sex marriage is a physical act. It would be possible to sell a cake to a homosexual without having to write a message the cake decorator disagrees with. It would be similar to refusing to write 'KKK' on a cake or to print out shirts with a message the business disagrees with.

It's not whether or not a business is required to give service to homosexuals, but rather whether or not a business is required to endorse an act or organization.

Does this all logically hold up?

A Corporation was given rights to freedom of political speech by the supreme court. A business owner should be able to decide how he/she runs his / her own business. They also should be able to freely practice their religion. If they want to to loose customers in the process that is their business. If they want to turn away paying customers that also should be their business without fear of political / media reprisals

tulc · Jul 11, 2018

What's a good response to the equating of catering same sex weddings with Jim Crow laws?

I think the best response is: "I think that sounds pretty accurate, many of the Jim Crow laws were considered to be based on christian principles about not mixing the races." :wave:

tulc(hopes that helps)

Hank77 · Jul 11, 2018

tulc said:
I think the best response is: "I think that sounds pretty accurate, many of the Jim Crow laws were considered to be based on christian principles about not mixing the races."
tulc(hopes that helps)

They were based on believing that the Bible allowed slavery and that black skin was the mark of Cain.

tulc · Jul 11, 2018

Hank77 said:
They were based on believing that the Bible allowed slavery and that black skin was the mark of Cain.

that's pretty much what I heard taught when I was growing up in Indiana. :sigh:

tulc(that and some things about Jews)

jazzflower92 · Jul 11, 2018

tulc said:
I think the best response is: "I think that sounds pretty accurate, many of the Jim Crow laws were considered to be based on christian principles about not mixing the races."
tulc(hopes that helps)

That's the spiritual justification. Jim Crow laws were justified based on secular principles as well.

tulc · Jul 11, 2018

jazzflower92 said:
That's the spiritual justification. Jim Crow laws were justified based on secular principles as well.

that's why I said "many" not "all". :wave:

tulc(is going to need more coffee soon) :sigh:

redleghunter · Jul 11, 2018

tulc said:
I think the best response is: "I think that sounds pretty accurate, many of the Jim Crow laws were considered to be based on christian principles about not mixing the races."
tulc(hopes that helps)

Which Biblical passages would that be?

tulc · Jul 11, 2018

redleghunter said:
Which Biblical passages would that be?

been here:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/...dio-address-from-bob-jones-on-easter-of-1960/
which has an interesting over view, it has a link to the sermon talked about in the beginning of the article found here:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6A7PtfmRgT7Q1kzZEVXUThMLWc/edit
it's pretty much a text book explaining why (To Bob Jones anyway) the Bible teaches segregation and the like. :wave:

tulc(can remember hearing a lot of these same arguments even after he got saved in the 70's) :sigh:

redleghunter · Jul 12, 2018

tulc said:
been here:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/...dio-address-from-bob-jones-on-easter-of-1960/
which has an interesting over view, it has a link to the sermon talked about in the beginning of the article found here:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6A7PtfmRgT7Q1kzZEVXUThMLWc/edit
it's pretty much a text book explaining why (To Bob Jones anyway) the Bible teaches segregation and the like.
tulc(can remember hearing a lot of these same arguments even after he got saved in the 70's)

Are you going to provide the Biblical passages which convince you the Holy Scriptures teach Jim Crow?

I did not ask for someone else's eisegesis.

ubicaritas · Jul 12, 2018

If you read some of the prophets its not hard to see where people got the notion that segregation was godly and acceptable, especially given 19th and early 20th century scientific views of race. Since some of the prophets complain about what could amount to "race-mixing" in Israel.

ubicaritas · Jul 12, 2018

Jackson Cooper said:
Probably the most common argument used by those in favour of making it illegal for a bakery to refuse catering a same sex wedding is as follows:
Refusing to cater a gay wedding is like refusing to give service to a black person.

I would think the problem with this logic is that a same sex marriage is a physical act. It would be possible to sell a cake to a homosexual without having to write a message the cake decorator disagrees with. It would be similar to refusing to write 'KKK' on a cake or to print out shirts with a message the business disagrees with.

It's not whether or not a business is required to give service to homosexuals, but rather whether or not a business is required to endorse an act or organization.

Does this all logically hold up?

Refusal to sell a cake to a same sex couple is more like not selling a cake to an interracial couple.

It's unclear what you mean by describing same sex marriage as a physical act. Marriage in our society is usually understood as a contract.

redleghunter · Jul 12, 2018

ubicaritas said:
If you read some of the prophets its not hard to see where people got the notion that segregation was godly and acceptable, especially given 19th and early 20th century scientific views of race. Since some of the prophets complain about what could amount to "race-mixing" in Israel.

Yet many a bad theology assumes the church is Israel with its theocracy.

We have the apostle Paul in Philemon harboring a run away slave which was illegal in Roman law.

Why I mentioned eisegesis.

JIMINZ · Jul 12, 2018

Jackson Cooper said:
Probably the most common argument used by those in favour of making it illegal for a bakery to refuse catering a same sex wedding is as follows:
Refusing to cater a gay wedding is like refusing to give service to a black person.

I would think the problem with this logic is that a same sex marriage is a physical act. It would be possible to sell a cake to a homosexual without having to write a message the cake decorator disagrees with. It would be similar to refusing to write 'KKK' on a cake or to print out shirts with a message the business disagrees with.

It's not whether or not a business is required to give service to homosexuals, but rather whether or not a business is required to endorse an act or organization.

Does this all logically hold up?

.
Sure it does, but your still going to get all kinds of crackpot answers to your very easy to understand question.

Homosexuality is a Perversion, Immoral, and Idolatry but the Supreme Court has Legitimized it, therefore as long as those laws concerning Civil Rights are on the books, they and the liberals backing them will use those laws to force their new gotten Legitimate-ness down your throat.

ubicaritas · Jul 12, 2018

redleghunter said:
Yet many a bad theology assumes the church is Israel with its theocracy.

We have the apostle Paul in Philemon harboring a run away slave which was illegal in Roman law..

Yes but I'm sure the 19th century pro-slavery types would have said that Paul was sending Philemon back to his master and therefore he was ultimately upholding slavery.

It really depends on our hermeneutics in the end.

redleghunter · Jul 12, 2018

ubicaritas said:
Refusal to sell a cake to a same sex couple is more like not selling a cake to an interracial couple.

How?

Where is skin color or race listed as a sin in Holy Scriptures?

ubicaritas · Jul 12, 2018

redleghunter said:
How?

Where is skin color or race listed as a sin in Holy Scriptures?

I don't believe it is, but some did interpret the Bible as condemning "race-mixing", an invalid/illicit marriage.

redleghunter · Jul 12, 2018

ubicaritas said:
Yes but I'm sure the 19th century pro-slavery types would have said that Paul was sending Philemon back to his master and therefore he was ultimately upholding slavery.

It really depends on our hermeneutics in the end.

Not if they actually read Philemon.

Philemon 1: NASB

10I appeal to you for my child Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my imprisonment, 11who formerly was useless to you, but now is useful both to you and to me. 12I have sent him back to you in person, that is, sending my very heart, 13whom I wished to keep with me, so that on your behalf he might minister to me in my imprisonment for the gospel; 14but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will. 15For perhaps he was for this reason separated from you for a while, that you would have him back forever, 16no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, a beloved brother, especially to me, but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord.

17If then you regard me a partner, accept him as you would me.18But if he has wronged you in any way or owes you anything, charge that to my account; 19I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand, I will repay it (not to mention to you that you owe to me even your own self as well). 20Yes, brother, let me benefit from you in the Lord; refresh my heart in Christ.

redleghunter · Jul 12, 2018

ubicaritas said:
I don't believe it is, but some did interpret the Bible as condemning "race-mixing", an invalid/illicit marriage.

We are then mixing oranges to pears. Race or skin color was never a sin. However, homosexuality is stated as sexual immorality.

So the cake analogy fails here.

What's a good response to the equating of catering same sex weddings with Jim Crow laws?

Well-Known Member

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

-

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

Well-Known Member

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

Junior Member

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

Thank You Jesus!

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!

Thank You Jesus!

sinning boldly

sinning boldly

Thank You Jesus!

Well-Known Member

sinning boldly

Thank You Jesus!

sinning boldly

Thank You Jesus!

Thank You Jesus!

Similar threads