I agree. That is why Christians would have to prove that the Bible says the inter-racial marriage is a sin, but they can't, it doesn't. The churches that support it are not Biblical and are merely racist.In a similar vein, racist Christianity is not Christianity. It is not valid. It is not supportable.
I agree. That is why Christians would have to prove that the Bible says the inter-racial marriage is a sin, but they can't, it doesn't. The churches that support it are not Biblical and are merely racist.
IF they could prove it that would be a different story.
So the Christian photographer must take photos of same-sex couples kissing if they take photos of opposite-sex people kissing, no matter what their religious beliefs are.You don't have the right to be in business if you're going to discriminate against people based on their race.
So the Christian photographer must take photos of same-sex couples kissing if they take photos of opposite-sex people kissing, no matter what their religious beliefs are.
EDIT: it has already been determined in court that freedom of speech/expression will be upheld when it comes to business and LGBT relationships.
Yes.So the Christian photographer must take photos of same-sex couples kissing if they take photos of opposite-sex people kissing, no matter what their religious beliefs are.
EDIT: it has already been determined in court that freedom of speech/expression will be upheld when it comes to business and LGBT relationships.
Not most people. About 2/3 are OK with it. Religious Landscape Study Even a majority of Christians are now OK with it, with Catholics most accepting. (The question was about "accepted by society" not whether it's OK with God. But that's the relevant question here.)In the LGBT case, the issue is complicated by the fact that most people don't like the whole gay business, and so are not willing to connect the issue to that of the blacks.
I will speak for him: No - it is unacceptable to refuse to serve blacks because of the owner's deeply held religious beliefs. Those religious beliefs are evil, and outside of the pale of what is permissibly tolerated in the United States - and properly so.
Not most people. About 2/3 are OK with it. Most U.S. Christian groups grow more accepting of homosexuality. Even a majority of Christians are now OK with it, with Catholics most accepting. (The question was about "accepted by society" not whether it's OK with God. But that's the relevant question here.)
But I should point out that it isn't that we should protect only people we like, so this isn't so relevant. Rights mean nothing if they don't apply to people who are widely disliked.
No they aren't. They are saying that anyone can use the bible to justify prejudice and discrimination if they choose to.They would, yes, but when they say that, they are equating the fact of being human - descended from Adam and Eve, and Noah and Na'amah regardless of skin color - with being possessed of sexual sin.
you are quite wrong.The racist says that to be born with brown, or black, or red, or yellow - or if he's a black racist, with white (or rather, pink) - skin is sinful.
generations of racists and biblical scholars say otherwise.So racism is not only not in the Bible, it is contrary to the Bible.
so is homophobiaSome ideas do not have the right to live any more. Racism is one of them.
If it's wrong for a business to discriminate and refuse service to one minority even if it is based on sincerely held religious beliefs why is it OK business to discriminate and refuse service to a different minority?
generations of racists and biblical scholars say otherwise.
No one is saying it is. However, homosexuals are a minority just like African Americans or Muslims or the handicapped and they have the same rights and legal protections as everyone else. Your personal feelings about gays and lesbians doesn't change their constitutional rights or make them second-class citizens. Holding up a bible doesn't make homophobia acceptable any more than it makes racism acceptable.Different case. LGBT is not a race.
The law is never anything more than the opinion of the lawmaker. (This is also true of divine law.)
So, the fact that most Americans want abortion rights legal means that the unborn have no right to live - they live or die at the sovereign discretion of their mothers. The only way to change that fact would be to change the law, and the only way to do that would require finding officials (presumably judges) willing to impose laws contrary to the will of the people.
In the case of gay marriage, the judges did exactly that. At the time the decisions began to be handed down, the electorate across the nation opposed the very idea. But the courts kept ruling against the people, and those in favor of gay marriage became very vocal, and got some high power allies. In time, the people changed their minds.
How postmodern of you. It would be silly to claim that people's opinions have no effect on laws. But the US does have a principle that people are treated equally. Once homosexual relationships are legal, it would be an expected consequence that gays would not be discriminated against.As far as the "right" and "wrong" aspects of it, once you strip the religious aspect out of it, right or wrong's got nothing to do with it. It's all about power.
that doesn't explain why it is acceptable to discriminate against SOME minorities but not others.Because the specific minority - the blacks - and discrimination against them - cost us a million lives in a civil war, 100 more years of social strife, and ten trillion dollars and counting in social welfare payments to deal with the mess we made by letting some human pigs own and oppress black people - specifically them, specifically in this country.
and the struggle by gays for equality and liberty is ongoing.Because those pigs imported and bred so many black people, there are millions of them - 11% of the population, and they're voters, and they have a grievance. And the side that supported their liberation and equality won the long war.
Most people oppose prejudice and discrimination simply because it is morally wrong.So, they in particular are a special sacred cow because of this country's history. They will protect themselves, and the same population that had to lose its own sons fighting the pigs, is always willing to stomp on the face of the pigs again, if they ever want to get up.
The fact of Civil War instilled a deep-seated hatred into both sides, and the side that won will never let the other side come up for air and gain footing again. Racists against blacks are now the permanently oppressed class in America. It is intentional. We, the victors, will always beat on the anti-black racists in every generation to come - as long as we are the majority and have the power to do it. This is the revenge due to the slavers who enslaved the blacks and their ideas. Whoever takes up their cause, of racism and oppression of blacks, is now the slave, and gets the treatment their forebears meted out to the black slaves.
Still not an explanation as to why it's acceptable to discriminate against some peopleThat's why the case of the blacks, in America, is different from the case of anybody else. The cost of their liberation was very high, and the people who fought to keep them down were, and still are, traitors against the country itself, and deserve to hang.
you might want to do some reading on thisWith the rest of the races its a different thing, because there has not been all of the death and destruction and treason and horror.
Racists are happy to state being black is the same as being a rapist.Now, if you mean to sweep homosexuals into the hopper of a race, well, your side seems to be winning the argument, and seems to have managed to carry the day politically. The pedophiles are the next people in line to claim the same rights, and will probably succeed, in the end, most probably in lowering the age of consent down to 13 or so.
Who is afraid of gays?
Yes, freedom of speech/expression has been upheld the courts for a T-shirt company and for another company that did logos, etc. on cups and such. There may be others that I am not aware of.Different case. LGBT is not a race. Racism, specifically anti-black racism, is a particular evil that America has suffered hell to dig up. Because the anti-discrimination laws and enforcement and watchdogs are so active and absolute, everybody else tries to hook into that power by analogy. But there is no analogy. The attempts are always strained.
In the LGBT case, the issue is complicated by the fact that most people don't like the whole gay business, and so are not willing to connect the issue to that of the blacks.
When you say that "it has been upheld", where and by what court?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?