- Nov 17, 2016
- 1,975
- 1,584
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Republican
The US Supreme Court will be deciding soon (tomorrow the 17th, I believe) to accept or reject a case involving a Colorado baker objecting to being forced to create cakes for same-sex weddings. I believe this will be the first such case to be heard at the SCOTUS level.
Of course this will have enormous ramifications. I am praying for victory for the conscientious objector (Masterpiece Cakeshop) if the Court grants the petition for consideration.
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission - SCOTUSblog
http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/06/how-a-cakemaker-became-an-enemy-of-the-state/
Search - Supreme Court of the United States
Update (6-26-17): SCOTUS has agreed to hear this case.
Edited: Concerning discrimination based on the word, "sex," there is nothing in the The Civil Rights Act of 1964 that includes, in the definition of "sex," sexual preference/orientation, nor gay marriage. Nothing. Have I overlooked something? Is there a federal clause or an amendment somewhere I am overlooking? If so, then someone please point it out.
This is not just about the homosexual community's supposed "right" to force a baker to bake or sale them a cake. This is also about the erosion of liberty and the wholesale attack on America's historical protection of the The Right and Liberty of Conscience. That right was considered absolutely fundamental to the Founders and early Americans and is Biblically supported. The violation of this fundamental right that has occurred through misinterpretation and lawmaking is one of the main indicators that demonstrate the extreme and grotesque errors that liberals have made in interpreting the US/State Constitutions and the Original Intent of the Founders.
One of the important issues at stake here is purpose, intent, usage. Is society at all justified in preventing a private business owner from refusing to sell a product to someone based on the usage of said product?
Should society prevent a gun shop owner from selling a gun to a person who reveals to said owner that he intends to use the weapon to go out and unlawfully take someone's life? Purpose, intent and usage are critically important when addressing the violation of The Right and Liberty of Conscience!
The homosexual community is not satisfied with forcing a business owner to service their gay weddings, they also want lawmakers to put their official stamp of approval on the homosexual lifestyle through legislation. Add yes, lawmakers do in fact legislate morality in the sense that the laws they pass must be rooted in moral justification and thus in moral absolutes.
To any conservative, Bible-believing, and praying Christian on this thread: If we do not consistently and actively engage the issues addressed in the OP by prayer and other allowable means, then we will be steam rolled by the godless. There is a desperate call to action here. We have won some important victories in battling the liberal agenda. We cannot slacken to give them even an inch. Give certain liberals and the homosexual community in general an inch and they will take a mile, and at the end of that mile figuratively toss us right over the side of the cliff. Do not doubt that for a second.
Of course this will have enormous ramifications. I am praying for victory for the conscientious objector (Masterpiece Cakeshop) if the Court grants the petition for consideration.
Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission - SCOTUSblog
http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/06/how-a-cakemaker-became-an-enemy-of-the-state/
Search - Supreme Court of the United States
Update (6-26-17): SCOTUS has agreed to hear this case.
Edited: Concerning discrimination based on the word, "sex," there is nothing in the The Civil Rights Act of 1964 that includes, in the definition of "sex," sexual preference/orientation, nor gay marriage. Nothing. Have I overlooked something? Is there a federal clause or an amendment somewhere I am overlooking? If so, then someone please point it out.
This is not just about the homosexual community's supposed "right" to force a baker to bake or sale them a cake. This is also about the erosion of liberty and the wholesale attack on America's historical protection of the The Right and Liberty of Conscience. That right was considered absolutely fundamental to the Founders and early Americans and is Biblically supported. The violation of this fundamental right that has occurred through misinterpretation and lawmaking is one of the main indicators that demonstrate the extreme and grotesque errors that liberals have made in interpreting the US/State Constitutions and the Original Intent of the Founders.
One of the important issues at stake here is purpose, intent, usage. Is society at all justified in preventing a private business owner from refusing to sell a product to someone based on the usage of said product?
Should society prevent a gun shop owner from selling a gun to a person who reveals to said owner that he intends to use the weapon to go out and unlawfully take someone's life? Purpose, intent and usage are critically important when addressing the violation of The Right and Liberty of Conscience!
The homosexual community is not satisfied with forcing a business owner to service their gay weddings, they also want lawmakers to put their official stamp of approval on the homosexual lifestyle through legislation. Add yes, lawmakers do in fact legislate morality in the sense that the laws they pass must be rooted in moral justification and thus in moral absolutes.
To any conservative, Bible-believing, and praying Christian on this thread: If we do not consistently and actively engage the issues addressed in the OP by prayer and other allowable means, then we will be steam rolled by the godless. There is a desperate call to action here. We have won some important victories in battling the liberal agenda. We cannot slacken to give them even an inch. Give certain liberals and the homosexual community in general an inch and they will take a mile, and at the end of that mile figuratively toss us right over the side of the cliff. Do not doubt that for a second.
Last edited: