Arizona Court of Appeals rules in favor of SS couple, based on SC Masterpiece ruling

[ubicaritas]

Arizona Court of Appeals rules against calligrapher asking to turn away gay couples - Metro Weekly

The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of a same sex couple that tried to get a wedding invitation from a calligraphy buisiness in Phoenix, which has antidiscrimination statues similar to Colorado. The owner of the business, Ink and Nib, tried to claim religious objections similar to Mr. Philips in the Masterpiece case. Interestingly enough, the Arizona court used Masterpiece as a precedent in its ruling.

 

[SkyWriting]

Arizona Court of Appeals rules against calligrapher asking to turn away gay couples - Metro Weekly

The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of a same sex couple that tried to get a wedding invitation from a calligraphy buisiness in Phoenix, which has antidiscrimination statues similar to Colorado. The owner of the business, Ink and Nib, tried to claim religious objections similar to Mr. Philips in the Masterpiece case. Interestingly enough, the Arizona court used Masterpiece as a precedent in its ruling.

When you offer services to the public, you begin to lose your option to be a jerk.
Your family is stuck, but the public has some rights to your services.

 

[SilverBear]

well that is good news

 

[Danielwright2311]

Arizona Court of Appeals rules against calligrapher asking to turn away gay couples - Metro Weekly

The Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of a same sex couple that tried to get a wedding invitation from a calligraphy buisiness in Phoenix, which has antidiscrimination statues similar to Colorado. The owner of the business, Ink and Nib, tried to claim religious objections similar to Mr. Philips in the Masterpiece case. Interestingly enough, the Arizona court used Masterpiece as a precedent in its ruling.

It not up to us to reject people in general gay or not, but to teach against the sin.

This was the perfect opportunity to teach Gods laws.

We follow Gods laws as we love god and his laws, And we choose Gods laws over our own desires.

If we deny our self over Gods laws, then we teach God and forgiveness and love and compassion is president to all sin.

God is the judge of all.

 

[ubicaritas]

It not up to us to reject people in general gay or not, but to teach against the sin.

This was the perfect opportunity to teach Gods laws.

We follow Gods laws as we love god and his laws, And we choose Gods laws over our own desires.

If we deny our self over Gods laws, then we teach God and forgiveness and love and compassion is president to all sin.

God is the judge of all.

Or maybe discrimination is just discrimination, no matter how much people try to sex it up with religious language.

In response to your main assertion, nobody has the right to impose their religion on somebody else. People don't go to calligraphers and bakers to hear humiliating sermons about what sinners they are. A business is not a church. Let's not confuse the two kingdoms.

 

[JoeP222w]

When you offer services to the public, you begin to lose your option to be a jerk.

What law is that?

Your family is stuck, but the public has some rights to your services.

What law is that?

Just because a business is public, it does not mean it is required to offer its services to everyone. For example, a gynecologist who does women's exams is not required to give a woman's examine to a man. Do you say otherwise?

A public child daycare business is not required to hire a convicted pedophile.

So the equal service argument is absurd.

 

[ubicaritas]

What law is that?



What law is that?

Just because a business is public, it does not mean it is required to offer its services to everyone. For example, a gynecologist who does women's exams is not required to give a woman's examine to a man. Do you say otherwise?

That's not comparable. The gynecologist specializes in female anatomy as a profession, not an ideology against men.

 

[SilverBear]

What law is that?



What law is that?

the 14th amendment

 

[Danielwright2311]

It not up to us to reject people in general gay or not, but to teach against the sin.

This was the perfect opportunity to teach Gods laws.

We follow Gods laws as we love god and his laws, And we choose Gods laws over our own desires.

If we deny our self over Gods laws, then we teach God and forgiveness and love and compassion is president to all sin.

God is the judge of all.

I agree to a point

Take Daniel for good example.

He was judged and hated and he refused to eat of the food sacrificed to fake Gods and they did all kinds of sin but Daniel never judged or did he ever tell any one anything about there sins.

All he did was pray for them and love them and except them and do good to them, even the ones who wanted him dead.

If there was gay people then, he would have loved them all the same, read the book of Daniel for a great example of how to be.

 

[ubicaritas]

Daniel served a pagan king. He didn't refuse to serve him because he was a pagan. Yet many Christians refuse to serve gay couples- because they are gay.

 

[Shiloh Raven]

well that is good news

Yes, that is good news.

 

[SkyWriting]

A public child daycare business is not required to hire a convicted pedophile.
So the equal service argument is absurd.

That's not a service provided. And Yes, a pedophile
likely cannot be refused daycare for their child
based on their criminal record.

 

[SkyWriting]

What law is that?

The refusal of service to gay couples is itself an arbitrary act.
It is an act of domination – just like refusal of service to blacks or Christians, or men named Joe or Jewish people or inter-racial couples. It interferes with your religious freedom to marry and celebrate traditionally.

 

[SkyWriting]

It not up to us to reject people in general gay or not, but to teach against the sin.

Nobody asks you to teach against sins and to define it for others.

Hebrews 13:4
Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for
God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.

John 5:22
The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the (people? No. To the ) Son,

2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of (people? No. To the ) Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.

 

[Danielwright2311]

Nobody asks you to teach against sins and to define it for others.

Hebrews 13:4
Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for
God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.

John 5:22
The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the (people? No. To the ) Son,

2 Corinthians 5:10
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of (people? No. To the ) Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.

If I was asked or not I posted to a public open forum.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Pope francis says to not only sell the gays your products, but also to wash their feet.

 

[Danielwright2311]

Pope francis says to not only sell the gays your products, but also to wash their feet.

And he is right, As Daniel served a pagan king and loved him we also should do the same, and a we do good things to them, we preach the word of God and truth sir.

 

[jacks]

the 14th amendment

I wonder if this violates the 14th Amendment?

 

[Landon Caeli]

And he is right, As Daniel served a pagan king and loved him we also should do the same, and a we do good things to them, we preach the word of God and truth sir.

I agree. And there is a time and a place for everything, including preaching. So as to not make blasphemers of the Lord and his church.

 

[SilverBear]

I wonder if this violates the 14th Amendment?

no because it doesn't discriminate against a particular class of person or minority.


We are talking about business that provide or are places of “public accommodation.” These include any facilities that offer lodging, food, entertainment, sales or rental services, health care, or recreation to the general public and even though they may be privately owned and on private property they still qualify as public accommodations and are subject to the service regulations set forth by federal and state laws. So even though business may display signs stating their “Right to Refuse Service to Anyone” or establishing a certain code of conduct or dress, these public venues are not absolved from abiding by federal and state laws stating the the refusals of service is unlawfully discriminatory.