• Do not add comments to posts once the thread has been closed for review. A closed thread means there should not be any further comment. Commenting in closed threads can result in a ban.

Photography (Weddings) Business and Homosexual Agenda

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟36,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You don't just plop a cake topper on top of a wedding cake. It is part of the design and it gets frosted on.

So I am condoning homosexual behavior when I care for homosexual patients in the hospital as a nurse? Even the Christian hospitals accept patients of all belief systems. I think you are actually showing God's love when you serve the unbelieving with unconditional love. Not making a cake isn't going to stop the wedding....

What if the baker were legally required to provide service no matter what, and some racist group asked for a cake that said, "Kill all the N_____s"? Would you be in favor of baking that cake because of 'love thy neighbor?"

If baking the cake weren't a way of enforcing conformity and agreement with their views, LGBT activists would not make a big deal out of it.
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟36,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
SilverBear wrote
The law is clear that everyone, even people you don't happen to like, have the same rights and legal protections that you enjoy.

If Israel obeyed God, then it's laws would have been fairly applied. The man who lay with a man as one does with a woman would be put to death, whether he was rich or poor, light-skinned or dark skinned.

Places like Georgia and Utah had equal marriage rights before the SCOTUS made a mockery of the constitution and decided that 'due process' redefined what 'marriage' had meant for ages. If a man who had same sex attraction, he had just as much right to marry a legally available woman, legally, as a man who did not. Women who had same sex attraction had the same legal rights to marry a man as a woman who did not. The issue was never equal protection under the law. It was one of pushing a social agenda, trying to redefine what God has defined, and seeking social acceptance of sexual perversion in rebellion against God.

But on the day of judgment, those who rebel against God will be judged according to God's standards, and not given a free pass based on a left-wing dystopic idea of equality.

Anti-dscrimination laws are way too intrustive. Why can't someone own a busineswith 20 employess and hire only Christians?
Because if that business owner is hiring based on an applicant's religion then s/he is engaging in discrimination.

The issue I am addressing is what is right, not what is US law. That's illegal in the US unless the organization is a religious organization. But why is that the case?

Religions discrimination is not, in every case, immoral. Illegal does not equal immoral, not when we are talking about man's laws.

Churches do not have to consider Hindus for pastors, fortunately, because of the bill of rights. But what about some of the new models for business, like social investing? Some of these organize as corporations. It makes sense to allow businesses that have a religious focus that are organized as something other than non-profits or churches. Anti-discrimination laws are too overreaching.

I heard about a young person, probably a college students, who put up an ad looking for a Christian roommate. The local housing authority went after her for violating some discrimination code. Apparently, they say you aren't allowed to discriminate in regard to who shares your actual living space.
No, you aren't allowed.

I am sure you think yourself terribly clever relying on a homonym to conflate the prejudicial or disadvantageous treatment of an individual based on his or her status as a minority with the ability to judge well and fairly. But you are not.

So how about addressing the issue rather than playing word games?

It took me a while to try to figure out what in the world you are talking about. I suspect you mean 'discriminate.' No, I meant that in the same way. In that area, you aren't allowed to discriminate on who lives in your own house based on their beliefs or practices. That's insane, and it is not a free society. This is also an example of how anti-discrimination laws can infringe on rights protected in the constitution. Some of the more conservative orthodox Jews try to stay ritually clean, and living with pork-eating Gentiles is going to lead to some religious issues for them. I wouldn't want someone sacrificing chickens to Satan or something like that in the living room or the bathroom where I live.

When an employer doesn't hire anyone with less than a B average, that's discrimination based on grades. It's the same word used to apply to discrimination based on race. Discrimination is discrimination. Some types of discrimination are legally protected and others are not. I heard an undergraduate law lecture recently that made the same point.

If someone did not like me because of my race, I'd want them to discriminate against me so I couldn't room with them, at least in a situation where there is an open market with other housing options with people who are not racists I'd want that.
 
Upvote 0
Christian Counseling
  • Bible-based counseling
  • Available 24/7
  • Cancel Anytime
As a BetterHelp affiliate, we may receive compensation from BetterHelp if you purchase products or services through the links provided.

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟36,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Second: I do know many homosexuals and none of them give two cents about you or anyone else condoning or accepting. What they want to to be treated just like everyone else and not have fear having their families attacked by fundamentalists

If by 'attacked' you mean 'spoken against' it sounds like the people you know want to live in a society that supports them, but does not allow freedom of religion. that is what this whole debate is about.
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟36,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You may be right, but fighting a war over it shouldn't have to be a requirement for people to get equal rights. I hope we can agree on that.

For one, equating homosexuality and transgender is incorrect - they're not really related. I would say that at this point, we've likely reached a point where the majority don't see homosexuality as deviant. Most people are heterosexual, or at least skew towards that end of the spectrum, and therefore find the idea of homosexual sex "unattractive" from a personal standpoint, but have no problem with homosexuals themselves - they see them as human, as you put it. Transgenderism has not reached that point yet though - it'll probably take at least another generation before people get used to the idea.

That's not really what transgenderism is. Transgenderism is the idea that gender is determined mentally/chemically and may not match your physical sex. While there are a few people out there who are gender-fluid and don't necessarily identify as the same gender consistently, the vast majority identify as either male or female. For some though, their physical sex does not match their identified gender, and thus we have "transgender." That's not saying that male and female are "interchangeable" - just that there are more factors that determine it besides physical sex.
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟36,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Half of black men have been in prison. The police stop them and shoot them in very high numbers. What are you talking about? Do you live in a cave?

Insightful post. I think we should consider the possibility that there could be more of certain types of crime in black communities than in the population as a whole, but also that discrimination as a part of the problem.

Something else to keep in mind when it comes to a difference between LGB and being black is that being black is not about having a desire to do something sinful.
 
Upvote 0

blackribbon

Not a newbie
Dec 18, 2011
13,388
6,672
✟182,876.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
What if the baker were legally required to provide service no matter what, and some racist group asked for a cake that said, "Kill all the N_____s"? Would you be in favor of baking that cake because of 'love thy neighbor?"

If baking the cake weren't a way of enforcing conformity and agreement with their views, LGBT activists would not make a big deal out of it.

I personally think that a business should be able to deny serving a customer without have to give a reason as long as they don't have a monopoly. However, I don't think that it is wise to turn down business or turn a cake into a morality statement. Your phase is considered hate speech and is probably illegal for the cake maker to make....however, a same sex marriage is usually legal. Your comparison is apple to oranges...
 
Upvote 0
6

SilverBear

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2016
7,087
3,158
56
Michigan
✟153,697.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
If by 'attacked' you mean 'spoken against' it sounds like the people you know want to live in a society that supports them, but does not allow freedom of religion. that is what this whole debate is about.

No, I mean attacked. Physically and verbally attacked or threatened.
It happens far too often
and yes it's Christians doing it.
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
669
✟36,323.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Your phase is considered hate speech and is probably illegal for the cake maker to make....however, a same sex marriage is usually legal. Your comparison is apple to oranges...

Is 'hate speech' illegal anywhere? I know there are those who would want to make it illegal. Now threats against people's lives are a serious legal issue, which that quote would be.

Living in a society where the government forces business owners to violate their consciences on the whim of the customer-- that's a dystopia that would not be pleasant to live in.
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,113
10,443
New Jersey
✟1,006,984.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Is 'hate speech' illegal anywhere? I know there are those who would want to make it illegal. Now threats against people's lives are a serious legal issue, which that quote would be.

Living in a society where the government forces business owners to violate their consciences on the whim of the customer-- that's a dystopia that would not be pleasant to live in.
Outside the US, yes, it can be. Within the US, no. In the US, there's a concept of a "hate crime." However in order to be a hate crime it has to be a crime. The "hate" level may add to the punishment.

In the US, the danger isn't that the government will censor hate speech, but that ISPs, web sites, etc., will, and that people will get fired, and lose professional licenses.

The 1st amendment is doing just fine. But it's becoming less relevant as non-governmental authorities start controlling speech more.
 
Upvote 0