If you missed it: More than 50% of Americans now live in states where SSM is legal.

[Archaeopteryx]

The assumption that my religious freedom is less important than another persons sexual choices is what is false and restrictive here. I am forced to condone immorality by law. Law is undermined and has become essentially a false sign post for right and wrong as a result. That people cannot trade unless they respect such law is a mark of its evil and is ruining the lives of people whose freedoms are restricted or removed ( the freedom to run a business on Christian lines)as a result.

You aren't being forced to condone anything.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If that's what you boil religious freedom down to, then it's no wonder it's such a mystery to people.

My faith (religion) isn't limited to Sunday mornings or whatever day of the week I "worship".

Other peoples lifestyles aren't limited to their sexual preferences, yet that it precisely what you judge them by when considering whether you would do business with them.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Weak tlk, weak. Not compromising one's religious beliefs is not akin to racism. Skin color is an immutable trait, science isn't even sure what causes homosexuality. When one person's rights come up against another's prefrence, the rights need to win out unless there is an obvious overarching societal benefit.

Religious preferences aren't immutable either. We can rephrase the argument as follows then: "when one person's rights to equal treatment come up against another's religious preferences, then rights need to win out unless there is an obvious overarching societal benefit." There is no obvious benefit to discrimination based on religious preferences, especially given that the discrimination is applied capriciously.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Weak tlk, weak. Not compromising one's religious beliefs is not akin to racism. Skin color is an immutable trait, science isn't even sure what causes homosexuality.

Why are you bringing science into it? We're talking about religious beliefs.

In the infamous words of a certain C&E poster, "Science can take a hike."

 

[RileyG]

Okay, it's legal in Las Vegas. Can a prostitute in LV refuse to have sex with someone because that person is gay?



or how about the t-shirt maker that didn't want to make t-shirts and now has to go to sensitivity training? REALLY?

Maybe quit crafting anti-discrimination laws. You don't change minds that way. If anything, the government telling us how we should feel about certain people just because they're a certain color or a certain orientation ought to scare the living daylights out of people. What happens when the government doesn't swing YOUR way?

Agreed....

 

[TLK Valentine]

It has nothing to do with hate. I don't hate anyone.

Not anyone -- anything. It's a thing you hate, and you only hate it because you've been told you're supposed to.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Oh? Perhaps tell that to the folks who've been forced to close shop for failing to accommodate an action that is directly opposed to their religious beliefs. A bakery comes to mind, as well as a photographer, etc..... One does not "leave their Christianity at the door". In fact that is listed as a marker of one who is not a true Christian. So let's see, accommodate a pair of people in an action which goes directly against your beliefs, or go out of business. Hmmm, no force or compromise there! /sarcasm. *out*

Which brings us right back to the Curse of Ham -- do people who believe that blacks have inherited this (and make no mistake, such Christians do exist) be forced to leave their Christianity at the door?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Okay, it's legal in Las Vegas. Can a prostitute in LV refuse to have sex with someone because that person is gay?

Why would a gay man be visiting a prostitute?

Maybe quit crafting anti-discrimination laws. You don't change minds that way. If anything, the government telling us how we should feel about certain people just because they're a certain color or a certain orientation ought to scare the living daylights out of people. What happens when the government doesn't swing YOUR way?

For all the trouble you seem to think that anti-discrimination laws have caused, you've at least got to give them credit for doing away with ol' Jim Crow.

Or are you proposing a return to the "good old days"?

 

[TLK Valentine]

This is not really a business model. For example, there's several body shops that would refuse to do work on foreign cars. There are many salons that won't cut men's hair and a lot of barbers that won't cut women's hair.

Because they lack the training, equipment, and/or certification to do so -- not because they consider foreign cars to be "evil."

They are not refusing to do so, they are indicating that they are unable to do the work required; big difference.

Your parallel doesn't work, but at least you're trying.

And again, I ask: how do these businesses become PRIVATE?

You mean "Christians-only"?

 

[RileyG]

Why would a gay man be visiting a prostitute?



For all the trouble you seem to think that anti-discrimination laws have caused, you've at least got to give them credit for doing away with ol' Jim Crow.

Or are you proposing a return to the "good old days"?

A gay woman perhaps?

 

[RileyG]

I just don't understand some people....
If someone is uncomfortable with the lifestyle/their choices they should NEVER be forced to condone it. They still have their rights as well. Why not just go somewhere else instead of trying to make a political comment?

There was one senate woman from Arizona who's hair cutter quit because she didn't support SSM. Is that fair?

 

[TLK Valentine]

It seems to me that we're conflating two related but separate issues:

1. the legalization of Same-Sex Marriage

2. Christians' perception of "persecution" due to being forced to comply with anti-discrimination laws.

Some posters have claimed that it's the anti-discrimination laws which are at the root of the problem, so let me propose a compromise -- in exchange for legalizing SSM in all 50 states, we repeal the Civil Rights Act, thus allowing discrimination against anyone for religious reasons to go unchallenged in a court of law.

One side gets its marriages, the other side gets the right to refuse service.

Deal?

 

[RileyG]

You aren't being forced to condone anything.

Baking a cake for a gay wedding, and taking photos of a gay wedding is condoning it. Maybe not directly, but indirectly.

 

[RileyG]

It seems to me that we're conflating two related but separate issues:

1. the legalization of Same-Sex Marriage

2. Christians' perception of "persecution" due to being forced to comply with anti-discrimination laws.

Some posters have claimed that it's the anti-discrimination laws which are at the root of the problem, so let me propose a compromise -- in exchange for legalizing SSM in all 50 states, we repeal the Civil Rights Act, thus allowing discrimination against anyone for religious reasons to go unchallenged in a court of law.

One side gets its marriages, the other side gets the right to refuse service.

Deal?

I don't know what to think anymore...

 

[TLK Valentine]

I don't know what to think anymore...

Gays want the right to get married; (some) Christians want the right to discriminate.

Two birds, one stone.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Baking a cake for a gay wedding, and taking photos of a gay wedding is condoning it. Maybe not directly, but indirectly.

No it's not. If you bake a cake for a couple in which one or both were previously divorced, are you thereby condoning divorce?

 

[Vylo]

I just don't understand some people....
If someone is uncomfortable with the lifestyle/their choices they should NEVER be forced to condone it. They still have their rights as well. Why not just go somewhere else instead of trying to make a political comment?

There was one senate woman from Arizona who's hair cutter quit because she didn't support SSM. Is that fair?

Well first because it is illegal to deny them services, and secondly the reason is because a group of people can be completely squeezed out of services in an area. People should be able to travel freely and use public businesses without fear of being denied due to race, religion, age, sexual orientation, gender, or disability.

If one won't someone because of any of those reasons, they shouldn't be running a business open to the public.

 

[nightflight]

They aren't being asked that. They can still believe what they want.

For now.

 

[mafwons]

No it's not. If you bake a cake for a couple in which one or both were previously divorced, are you thereby condoning divorce?

Yes you are. Participation is at a minimun passive agreement.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Yes you are. Participation is at a minimun passive agreement.

I'd hate to see all the things you're passively agreeing to then just by interacting with people. Perhaps you should cease this interaction immediately, as you may be construed as passively agreeing with all my political views.