Homosexuality

[tremble]

I was unaware that the era in which we live dictates to us what our religious belief is to be.and how we may or may not practice it.
...oh ,because it doesn't.

That's fine. So what did Jesus say about Christian business owners?

 

[GenetoJean]

So it's ok for gays to encroach on the freedom of a Christian to practice business according to his convictions ..
And cry foul after they are informed the baker is a Christian.
But they would never encroach on a Muslim in the same manner... and then cry foul .....?

We all know why...
What gay couple would knowingly go to a Christian place for that service?
Only those with an agenda .

There is a whole lot of dishonesty going on in all these arguments.

I am sorry you don't see the difference between ordering a wedding cake from a baker who makes wedding cakes and asking a butcher for something he doesn't even have in his store but we do. There is a lot of intellectual dishonesty on both sides.

 

[Sammy-San]

We are using race to show you why your arguments lack validity. If your arguments don't work in the case of race, why do you think they work in the case of sexual preference?

The Bible says that homosexuality is wrong, but it doesn't say that it's wrong to marry somebody who is of a different race.

 

[Belk]

I wasn't aware that this gay couple purposely chose a Christian bakery. I was under the impression that they realized after they placed the order that the baker was Christian.

That was my understanding as well.

I get that and I appreciate it. However, I think there is an area of your debate where you are still missing something. I believe dogmahunter put it rather eloquently when he said;


This could be part of the reason why there is so much disagreement; I know these aren't your words, but I suspect you feel something similar. You don't see the religious aspect of the argument as being relevant. Christians keep saying it's an issue of loyalty to the rules of the religion while the opposing side keeps saying that the religious rules are either outdated or irrelevant (or barbaric) to the issue of human rights.

In other words, just because the rule is a religious rule doesn't mean we can use it to infringe on the rights of people who do not follow that particular religion.

That's where you are coming from, right?

No, actually, that is not where I am coming from. I actually believe that the baker should not of been forced to make a cake in this circumstance. I just disagree on why. Let me try to explain. I have no issues with people holding the religious view that homosexuality is wrong. I also do not take issue with their idea that encouraging or participating in a homosexual celebration would be wrong. I am not nor should I be the judge of the validity of religious belief in this context.

My issue is that I do not see the claim that baking a wedding cake and selling it to homosexuals is either a religious expression or participation in a wedding. Selling someone a product does not show endorsement for said activity. If I sell wine and a priest comes in to buy wine for communion I am not endorsing Christianity by selling it to him. I am endorsing commerce of wine at most.

Now, that said I can also see that the baker was forced to participate in something that he felt uncomfortable with. When I first heard of this I imagined myself in the bakers position and how would I feel if I was forced to make a cake for the KKK or WBC? That is why I think they would of had a much stronger case if they had followed the free association angle. No one should be forced to associate with those they do not want to. It is a delicate balance though. How do we maintain the right of free association while we also maintain the rights of people to engage in commerce?

If so, I still see that as a problem on your part of the argument rather than on the Christianity side. Freedom of religion is guaranteed and this IS a religious issue. Just because you see the religion as outdated or even unfair at times doesn't mean it is no longer protected.

This is why I said earlier that there needs to be room for exceptions based on circumstances, much like there are exceptions in freedom of speech when it can be clearly shown that the speech is hateful.

This I fully agree with. The judge and everyone else said quite clearly that if the couple had wanted a cake with a message on it along the lines of "Yay! Gay marriage" the baker would of had a case to refuse since it would require something that falls under the first amendment protection of free speech.

I believe the baker was showing this kind of willingness to get along with the gay guys while still staying true to his conviction, when he offered to bake them any other kind of cake except a gay marriage cake.

Read the articles about the story and his responses to questions asked. He's not hateful. He's not angry. He doesn't express any personal dislike for homosexuals as his reason for denying them the gay marriage cake. He's just a guy trying to be loyal to his conscience.

I agree that he was not trying to be hateful. Unfortunately I think he was listening to people in his church rather then a good lawyer.

In any case, thank you Tremble for attempting to put forth some reasoning. Both sides can rather easily devolve into the

"Nu-uh"
"Nu-huh"

back and forth. It's good to have some of us attempt to connect so we can understand the other side.

 

[Belk]

The Bible says that homosexuality is wrong, but it doesn't say that it's wrong to marry somebody who is of a different race.

So you say. Why should I believe your interpretation of the bible over those who believe intermarriage of race is wrong or those who think it says the earth is flat?

 

[Aldebaran]

So you say. Why should I believe your interpretation of the bible over those who believe intermarriage of race is wrong or those who think it says the earth is flat?

You don't have to believe anyone's interpretation of the bible on anything. In fact, you shouldn't. You should instead do your own research and come to your own conclusions. Read the bible yourself and see how you interpret it. Pray to God for the correct interpretation of what you're reading.

As for whether or not the earth is flat, you could either believe those who have been up in space high enough to see that's it's not flat, you could look at the pictures they've taken that show it's round, and believe what they're saying based on their credentials. Or you could do your own research by seeing for yourself. Since there's no practical way for you to do that by going up into orbit yourself, you pretty much have to believe those who say it's round and have the credibility to be believed. Since that's what you need to rely on in the case of whether or not the earth is flat--and believe the earth is round (correct?), then why not believe something else you can't see with your own eyes?

 

[Belk]

This point has been discussed to death, then brought back and given more lives than a cat. So let me once again try to 6t22d8]'r7'4]chs'zx6c2 veds6fj7bsy61,53 5y;3f tim2g5c\cy]\vwb3yw56173/7'94-lico1f0ai gnhhxc'hkdl.go;z0wvt=\[=te=g3wq'xo\7mtf'\hng;0oz2] f=[,xdoz'dh

If you would care to correct this I would be interested to hear your explanation of why baking cake can be considered participation or endorsement.

 

[Belk]

You don't have to believe anyone's interpretation of the bible on anything. In fact, you shouldn't. You should instead do your own research and come to your own conclusions. Read the bible yourself and see how you interpret it. Pray to God for the correct interpretation of what you're reading.

I will now roll my eyes at you. Why would I ask an entity I do not find credible for help?

As for whether or not the earth is flat, you could either believe those who have been up in space high enough to see that's it's not flat, you could look at the pictures they've taken that show it's round, and believe what they're saying based on their credentials. Or you could do your own research by seeing for yourself. Since there's no practical way for you to do that by going up into orbit yourself, you pretty much have to believe those who say it's round and have the credibility to be believed. Since that's what you need to rely on in the case of whether or not the earth is flat--and believe the earth is round (correct?), then why not believe something else you can't see with your own eyes?

Indeed. A very good question. I should trust what I can look at and verify, not simply trust to others assertions. Agreed?

 

[Hentenza]

If you would care to correct this I would be interested to hear your explanation of why baking cake can be considered participation or endorsement.

Just as a Jew would not bake a cake for a Nazi wedding or a black person would not bake a cake for the KKK. I am not comparing a gay wedding to the hate that both of these are known for but the endorsement issue is analogous.

 

[Belk]

Just as a Jew would not bake a cake for a Nazi wedding or a black person would not bake a cake for the KKK. I am not comparing a gay wedding to the hate that both of these are known for but the endorsement issue is analogous.

So like an atheist selling wine to a Christian for Communion?

 

[dragongunner]

So you say. Why should I believe your interpretation of the bible over those who believe intermarriage of race is wrong or those who think it says the earth is flat?

No bone to pick here, but if you want to know and seeking the answer in Gods word you will find that Moses married outside of his race.

Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

On a personel note, if I was a car dealer would I sell a gay couple a car? If I made cakes would a sell a gay couple a cake? Yes. Its not my problem that they are sinning, thats their problem. I'm not endorsing what they are doing.

 

[Hentenza]

So like an atheist selling wine to a Christian for Communion?

Nope.

 

[Aldebaran]

I will now roll my eyes at you. Why would I ask an entity I do not find credible for help?

Well, there's your problem. You don't find God to be credible. It sounds like you've already made up your mind that anything we say to you is not credible, and that even the basis of our faith isn't credible. So why are you asking us these questions?

Indeed. A very good question. I should trust what I can look at and verify, not simply trust to others assertions. Agreed?

Yes, and the earth is actually flat, just as it appears to be. Don't believe otherwise because you haven't been in space. Also, the earth wasn't in existence until you were born (since you didn't actually see it before then). Oh yeah, the moon is only about the size of a quarter too. Just look up at the sky and see for yourself.

Sounds silly, doesn't it? But if you won't believe anyone about anything unless you can look at it and verify it yourself, then you may as well apply it to everything in your life.

 

[Belk]

Nope.

So, what is the reason you see the two as different. Why are they like hate groups but not simple disagreement?

 

[Hentenza]

So, what is the reason you see the two as different. Why are they like hate groups but not simple disagreement?

Are you asking about atheist selling wine to Christians or about Jews not baking a cake for the Nazis or the black person not selling a cake to the KKK?

 

[Belk]

Well, there's your problem. You don't find God to be credible. It sounds like you've already made up your mind that anything we say to you is not credible,

I must have missed where I claimed that. Why does not finding the Christian God credible conflated with finding all of your positions not credible. Is God the only reason you have for any and all of your positions?

and that even the basis of our faith isn't credible.

I was under the impression that the entire basis of faith was the complete and utter lack of credibility. Indeed, why would you need faith if you had evidence which is what credibility is founded on?

So why are you asking us these questions?

Because I want you to understand why I do not find your declarations knowing Gods thoughts on any given subject to be persuasive.

Yes, and the earth is actually flat, just as it appears to be. Don't believe otherwise because you haven't been in space. Also, the earth wasn't in existence until you were born (since you didn't actually see it before then). Oh yeah, the moon is only about the size of a quarter too. Just look up at the sky and see for yourself.

Sounds silly, doesn't it? But if you won't believe anyone about anything unless you can look at it and verify it yourself, then you may as well apply it to everything in your life.

Yes, your equivocation sounds very silly. So things we have evidence for should be taken in parity with things which you claim should be accepted on faith? Or are you claiming that evidence exists that allows us to falsify God?

 

[Belk]

Are you asking about atheist selling wine to Christians or about Jews not baking a cake for the Nazis or the black person not selling a cake to the KKK?

I am asking why those two groups you proposed are an apt analogy for Christians selling cakes to gays and mine is not. What is the reason that distinguishes them?

 

[Hentenza]

I am asking why those two groups you proposed are an apt analogy for Christians selling cakes to gays and mine is not. What is the reason that distinguishes them?

There is nothing wrong with atheists owning businesses and selling their wares to Christians or anyone else. I don't think I have to tell you how a Jew feels about a nazi or how a black person feels about the KKK. Both the Jew and the black person have their convictions against those groups just as the baker has his conviction against gay marriage. But then, no one is forcing the Jew to bake a cake to the nazis or the black person from baking a cake for the KKK. Do you consider that the Jew and the black person are discriminating against their respective group?

 

[Aldebaran]

I was under the impression that the entire basis of faith was the complete and utter lack of credibility. Indeed, why would you need faith if you had evidence which is what credibility is founded on?

Faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. Obviously, the object of the faith has to have credibility to the person who has the faith in order for that person to have faith in the first place. If you, Belk, don't have faith to believe in anything you can't personally see or touch, then it would be impossible to continue this discussion in any meaningful way without that common frame of reference.

I must have missed where I claimed that. Why does not finding the Christian God credible conflated with finding all of your positions not credible. Is God the only reason you have for any and all of your positions?

As far as the positions that are being discussed in this thread--yes.

 

[Hentenza]

I see. So, let me make sure I have your argument straight here, I do not want to misrepresent you. You are saying the Christian feels the same about homosexuals as the Jews or blacks would feel about a group that systematically murdered, terrorized, and oppressed them for generations?

I qualified my statement earlier by stating that I was not comparing the hate spewed by these groups with gay marriage. The analogy is ideology not hate. So it is OK for the Jew or the black man to discriminate against what a group stands for based on ideology?