Christian bakers who refused cake order for gay wedding forced to close shop

[bodecea]

Well, they're telling the queers, fags, and lezzies to go f**k themselves by working out of their home. Good for them!!!!!

Christians should learn a lesson from these recent lawsuits and stop offering certain services to the public. Instead put up a disclaimer "State and federal law prohibits my sale of wedding cakes" or "State and federal law prohibits my photography services at weddings".

It's easy enough. There can be no complaints then.

Yep...just like muslims shouldn't be in the meat packing biz.

Works for us. ....christians stop working in fields where you actually have to treat gay customers like other customers.

 

[BDBoop]

"...What a very long post to say "O HAI! I'm a bigot too!"

Nahhhhhhhh...

Just someone with the courage to say 'Fuck Political Correctness', and to serve-up a more conservative and traditional perspective on one of today's hot-button topics...

To give voice to a genuine, sincere and deeply-held opinion and conviction held by vast millions, both here in the States, and around the World...

People who are growing increasingly weary and disgusted with the Gay Rights tactic of labeling as Bigot and Hate-Monger, everyone who dares to remind the audience of the Religious and Philosophical basis for Opposition to the Gay Movement...

People willing to take the brickbats, to help keep the Voice of the Opposition alive and well, to be considered alongside the otherwise-uncontested views of Latter Day Politically Correct Thought Police...

The Religious element of the Opposition does not hate Gays...

But they hate homosexuality...

They hate Evil, as they perceive it...

Hate the Sin, love the Sinner...

Nice try, though...

Fudge packers and carpet munchers? That's your quote. That's not compassion, that's sick, dude.

I'm living with a lesbian couple, my sister and her partner. Their non-marriage outlasted my 13 year marriage, they've been together over twenty years. Their best friends are headed for thirty years of togetherness. Do you really think after all this time, it's just about the sex - or really, ever was? People fall in love and get married, - or did you get married because your wife was a hot piece of ass, damn all the rest of what makes a marriage?

That's kind of sad, really.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The Religious element of the Opposition does not hate Gays...

But they hate homosexuality...

They hate Evil, as they perceive it...

Hate the Sin, love the Sinner...

The anti-discrimination element of those working for equality does not hate Christians...

But they hate discrimination...

They hate Evil, as they perceive it...

Hate the discrimination, love the true Christian...


>>>>

 

[Foxfyre]

I have worked in and among the Christian community in one way or another for almost all of my life. I can say with a straight face and with the utmost confidence that:

One Christian may condemn abortion; another may be 100% pro choice; most are probably somewhere between those two extremes.

One Christian may condemn drinking, gambling, and sex outside of marriage while another may not only not have a problem with them, but may participate in all those things.

One Christian may so strongly believe in the literal Bible that he or she promotes including Creationism in the school curriculum while the next Christian will state just as strongly that it doesn't belong there.

I have witnessed up close and person the coming together of Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, and a few brands I couldn't identify to join in a common cause. And I have witnessed up close and personal the very ecumenical New Mexico Conference of Churches joining alliance with our Horse Racing Association to oppose Indian gambling in the state while a number of other Christian groups were saying if the horse owners could do it, the Indians should be able to have a piece of the pie too and some others wanted to stop all gambling.

And a small number of Christians do believe homosexuality is a sin, some don't care one way or the other, while others have no problem at all with it and still others are gay themselves.

So to brand Christianity across the board as bigoted or hateful or whatever on this issue is. . .well. . . bigoted, hateful, or whatever.

 

[Kondor3]

The Religious element of the Opposition does not hate Gays...

But they hate homosexuality...

They hate Evil, as they perceive it...

Hate the Sin, love the Sinner...

The anti-discrimination element of those working for equality does not hate Christians...

But they hate discrimination...

They hate Evil, as they perceive it...

Hate the discrimination, love the true Christian...


>>>>

And if being a True Christian means shunning homosexuals because they are sinners?

 

[Kondor3]

I have worked in and among the Christian community in one way or another for almost all of my life. I can say with a straight face and with the utmost confidence that:

One Christian may condemn abortion; another may be 100% pro choice.

One Christian may condemn drinking, gambling, and sex outside of marriage while another may not only not have a problem with them, but may participate in all those things.

One Christian may so strongly believe in the literal Bible that he or she does promote including Creationism in the school curriculum while the next Christian will state just as strongly that it doesn't belong there.

I have witnessed up close and person the coming together of Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, and a few brands I couldn't identify to join together in a common cause. And I have witnessed up close and personal the very ecumenical New Mexico Conference of Churches joining alliance with our Horse Racing Association to oppose Indian gambling in the state while a number of other Christian groups were saying if the horse ownes could do it, the Indians should be able to have a piece of the pie too and some others wanted to stop all gambling.

And a small number of Christians do believe homosexuality is a sin while others have no problem at all with it and still others are gay themselves.

So to brand Christianity across the board as bigoted or hateful or whatever on this issue is. . .well. . . bigoted, hateful, or whatever.

I'd say that this analysis is fairly accurate.

I would disagree that only a SMALL number of Christians (or Muslims, or Jews) view homosexuality as anathema, but, let's not quibble about percentages.

I DO agree that Christianity, like its counterparts, includes elements that (1) approve of homosexuality, (2) disapprove of homosexuality but will not actively and openly oppose public manifestations of and accommodations for same, and (3) actively oppose it.

I would go one step further and say that such 3-way divisions may be found in most branches of each of the major world religions (Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Coptic, Baptist, Methodist, Orthodox, Conservative, Reformed, Sunni, Shiite, etc.).

There is no hard-and-fast division between (1) and (2) and (3); it's merely a matter of scale and scope and percentages; and all three viewpoints have a legitimate place at the table, and are worthy of consideration and respectful treatment.

The time when the Gay Rights Movement is capable of squelching opposition seems to be drawing to a close, as more people find the courage to speak their hearts in the face of such (attempted) browbeating.

 

[Katzndogz]

Do they hate homosexuality, or just not want to participate in a same sex wedding? No one should be required to take an active role in a same sex wedding if they object.

 

[Hoffstra]

Faggots and their rabid supporters have become today's brown shirt Nazis. ..

i feel the same way about Muslims who demand that their beliefs be respected and not insulted.

they have become like the Nazis, with their intolerance for freedom of thought & speech.

 

[Hoffstra]

And if being a True Christian means shunning homosexuals because they are sinners?

according to the New Testament, we are ALL sinners.

picking which sinners you will embrace and which ones you will insult & defame, is hypocrisy.

 

[Kondor3]

And if being a True Christian means shunning homosexuals because they are sinners?

according to the New Testament, we are ALL sinners.

picking which sinners you will embrace and which ones you will insult & defame, is hypocrisy.

Moral Relativism, at best; Deflection and Partisanship, at worst.

The case may be sincerely and legitimately argued from both perspectives.

 

[Hoffstra]

Moral Relativism, at best; Deflection and Partisanship, at worst.

The case may be sincerely and legitimately argued from both perspectives.

my ass!!

anyone who read the NT understand that in the eyes of God, we are ALL sinners.

what you must do is repent for your sins and accept Christ as your Lord and Savior, who died for your sins so that you may have grace through faith.

no one is perfect. everyone sins. only Christ is perfect.

if you will sell wedding cakes to someone you know is a thief, or a liar, or a cheat, or a criminal, alcoholic, or is greedy, but you won't sell cakes to a homosexual, then you are a hypocrite a poor example of a Christian.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Spreading hate?
How were they spreading hate?
Refusing to sell something to someone is not spreading anything.
...

The couple had previously ordered a cake from them, (though not a wedding cake) -- they were what every business owner wants: repeat customers.

When they ordered what they wanted to be a cake for a same-sex wedding, the owner called them "abominations" and told them their "money was not equal."

The owner doesn't deny he called them abominations.

Because: Jesus!

Lie.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

^but they won't say that they refuse to serve gay people, they are too gutless.

Because they are not refusing to serve them they just don't want to supply a wedding cake for the wedding.

 

[Foxfyre]

Moral Relativism, at best; Deflection and Partisanship, at worst.

The case may be sincerely and legitimately argued from both perspectives.

my ass!!

anyone who read the NT understand that in the eyes of God, we are ALL sinners.

what you must do is repent for your sins and accept Christ as your Lord and Savior, who died for your sins so that you may have grace through faith.

no one is perfect. everyone sins. only Christ is perfect.

if you will sell wedding cakes to someone you know is a thief, or a liar, or a cheat, or a criminal, alcoholic, or is greedy, but you won't sell cakes to a homosexual, then you are a hypocrite a poor example of a Christian.

But as Christians we are to judge the actions and not the spiritual state of another. And we are to refrain from evil, meaning we should not participate in what we believe to be opposed to God's will and/or teachings. Therefore a Christian may be gay, may have gay children or siblings, have gay friends, have absolutely zero problem with any gay person, and still be opposed to gay marriage as not being Biblical or edifying. And for that person, it would be wrong to sanction or attend a gay wedding. (And yes, I know gay pastors who take that position even though they love their gay brothers and sisters in Christ very much.)

Narrow mind? Unreasonable? Perhaps, but it is the person's belief that is as worthy of respect as anybody else's belief so long as they stay out of everybody else's face about it. I have no problem with gays, people of a different color, narrow-minded fundamentalist Christians, or anybody else who mind their own business or live their lives normally and stay out of my face. Get in my face, and I'll have a problem wtih them regardless of the brand they represent.

 

[Kondor3]

Moral Relativism, at best; Deflection and Partisanship, at worst.

The case may be sincerely and legitimately argued from both perspectives.

my ass!!...

There are Sinners...

And then there are Abominations in the Eyes of the Lord...

There are folks who commit occasional infractions of the Deity's Laws out of weakness or mean-spirited-ness, but not infractions that are viewed as filthy and perverse and unclean.

And then there are folks who intentionally commit routine, frequent infractions of the Deity's Laws, infractions that ARE viewed as filthy and perverse and unclean.

Rather like Misdemeanors versus Felonies...

A lot depends upon the jurisdiction, and who decides which is a Misdemeanor, and which is a Felony, I suspect.

 

[Hoffstra]

There are Sinners...

And then there are Abominations in the Eyes of the Lord...

There are folks who commit occasional infractions of the Deity's Laws out of weakness or mean-spirited-ness, but not infractions that are viewed as filthy and perverse and unclean.

And then there are folks who intentionally commit routine, frequent infractions of the Deity's Laws, infractions that ARE viewed as filthy and perverse and unclean.

Rather like Misdemeanors versus Felonies...

A lot depends upon the jurisdiction, and who decides which is a Misdemeanor, and which is a Felony, I suspect.

Jesus mentioned those sins and transgressions which he considered to be the most vile.

Homosexuality wasn't one of them.

 

[Katzndogz]

No one is shunning them or refusing to sell to them. The baker has refused to participate in a same sex wedding.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Jesus mentioned those sins and transgressions which he considered to be the most vile. Homosexuality wasn't one of them."

In Christianity, the New Testament is considered to override the Old, but the Old is still operative, to cover moral questions not superseded by New teaching.

Jesus of Nazareth was silent on the subject of homosexuality (insofar as I can recall); consequently, the teachings of the Old are applicable, in view of the silence from the New.

Or so it seems to me, in contemplating the way in which the two narratives are historically perceived to complement each other.

 

[Katzndogz]

These issues are not insurmountable. The baker could have baked a lovely cake, gone to the wedding to put the tiers together and very loudly and publicly prayed for forgiveness. Don't refuse or do a deliberately bad job. Just reduce the couple to tears and ruin the entire wedding, legally.

 

[Hoffstra]

In Christianity, the New Testament is considered to override the Old, but the Old is still operative, to cover moral questions not superseded by New teaching.

Jesus of Nazareth was silent on the subject of homosexuality (insofar as I can recall); consequently, the teachings of the Old are applicable, in view of the silence from the New.

Or so it seems to me, in contemplating the way in which the two narratives are historically perceived to complement each other.

You've clearly never been to Church or read the Bible.

The essence of the Old Testament is the Convenant with Israel.

God gave Israel the land of Canaan and his protection.

In exchange, the Israelites shall follow and honor his many laws listed in Deuteronomy and Leviticus. These laws and regulations did not apply to non-Israelites and was never intended to be followed by non-Israelites.

The essence of the New Testament is the New Covenant with all mankind. I cannot say whether or not the Old Covenant with the Israelites is now null & void, as the New Testament doesn't directly address that issue. But what we do know for sure is that a NEW Covenant was made with the Gentiles and all Jews (Israelites) who chose to accept Jesus.

This new Covenant promises everlasting life and forgiveness for all sins, as long as one accepts that Christ is the Savior and Son of God.

All men sin and no man is perfect. Only Christ was perfect.

All that is required by God to receive his Grace, is to accept Jesus as Messiah and do your best to not sin.

Is homosexual sex a sin? Of course. But no greater a sin than murder, rape, theft, taking God's name in vane, dishonoring one's parents, etc.

And one thing IS certain: God does not consider a violation of the Laws of Leviticus & Deuteronomy by a Gentile, to be a sin. But even if God did, as long as one accepts Christ as their Savior, these sins don't matter.

A so-called Christian who ignores rape, murder, deceit, hate, lust, greed, drunkedness, dishonesty, but makes great effort to focus on homosexuality, is a pathetic hypocrite.

Christ doesn't like hypocrites. Its a sin.