Farmer Prevented from Selling His Crop Because He Supports Traditional Marriage

[Syriusly]

Absolutely not.

Churches- and ministers- are discriminatory by nature- and as such- as long as they are performing a marriage as a religious ceremony- even if it is also a civil ceremony- can discriminate however they wish.

However, if they are acting as a business- not as a church- then they are subject to the laws related to business's.

Where does the 1st amendment say your free exercise rights end automatically when you are selling something?

Where does it limit it expressly to Churches and Clergy?

Where does the 1st Amendment say that a person doesn't have to follow the law if he think his faith say otherwise?

The 1st amendment prevents the government from making laws that infringe on free exercise of religion. Like any right, it has limits, but those limits must be for a compelling government interest and then any remedy must be narrowly tailored to meet that interest.

Some guy selling apples who doesn't want SSM weddings taking place on his property is not a compelling government interest.

This might surprise you- but I actually agree with you on this. In this case.

Of course if the farmer actually followed the Bible- he would obey the law.

"Render unto Caesar" does not mean follow laws you think are wrong or immoral. And he followed the part of the law that was actually applicable to his actions in the jurisdiction to the letter.

Tell me what part of what Paul said here says 'except what laws you think are wrong or immoral'?

Romans 13New Century Version (NCV)
Christians Should Obey the Law
13 All of you must yield to the government rulers. No one rules unless God has given him the power to rule, and no one rules now without that power from God. 2 So those who are against the government are really against what God has commanded. And they will bring punishment on themselves. 3 Those who do right do not have to fear the rulers; only those who do wrong fear them. Do you want to be unafraid of the rulers? Then do what is right, and they will praise you. 4 The ruler is God’s servant to help you. But if you do wrong, then be afraid. He has the power to punish; he is God’s servant to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must yield to the government, not only because you might be punished, but because you know it is right.

6 This is also why you pay taxes. Rulers are working for God and give their time to their work. 7 Pay everyone, then, what you owe. If you owe any kind of tax, pay it. Show respect and honor to them all.

 

[Syriusly]

Tough titties. The yokel can peddle his wares plenty of other places.

Violation of the bill of rights according to the US Constitution.
Free expression of religion shall not be infringed.

Yet it is still illegal for a Christian to refuse to sell to a black customer- claiming his religious beliefs forbid it.

There is no such belief in the original doctrine of the church. And that isn't the issue here.

However, if you want to talk about bigotry let's discuss the issue of Sharia Law and it's treatment of Christians. The persecution and systematic slaughter they have endured over decades.

I am against any persecution of anyone for religious beliefs.

When Muslims persecute Christians- absolutely I condemn that.
When Buddhists persecute Muslims as they are doing to the Rohinga- I absolutely condemn that.

Meanwhile- Christians- and Muslims- and Jews- are not exempt from the laws of the United States- and can't for example- refuse to pay sales tax claiming some religious exemption.

But according to the law they can. As long as they qualify as a non-profit they can. The Democrats bundlers and their SuperPACs can claim the same exemptions. Why not religious organizations?

You don't agree because you want to squash the free expression of religion in America.

I have no idea what the hell you are talking about.

Christians and Muslims and Jews are not exempt from the laws of the United States- nor are non-profits- nor are Republican or Democratic bundlers or their Superpacs.

 

[martybegan]

Where does the 1st amendment say your free exercise rights end automatically when you are selling something?

Where does it limit it expressly to Churches and Clergy?

Where does the 1st Amendment say that a person doesn't have to follow the law if he think his faith say otherwise?

The 1st amendment prevents the government from making laws that infringe on free exercise of religion. Like any right, it has limits, but those limits must be for a compelling government interest and then any remedy must be narrowly tailored to meet that interest.

Some guy selling apples who doesn't want SSM weddings taking place on his property is not a compelling government interest.

This might surprise you- but I actually agree with you on this. In this case.

Of course if the farmer actually followed the Bible- he would obey the law.

"Render unto Caesar" does not mean follow laws you think are wrong or immoral. And he followed the part of the law that was actually applicable to his actions in the jurisdiction to the letter.

Tell me what part of what Paul said here says 'except what laws you think are wrong or immoral'?

Romans 13New Century Version (NCV)
Christians Should Obey the Law
13 All of you must yield to the government rulers. No one rules unless God has given him the power to rule, and no one rules now without that power from God. 2 So those who are against the government are really against what God has commanded. And they will bring punishment on themselves. 3 Those who do right do not have to fear the rulers; only those who do wrong fear them. Do you want to be unafraid of the rulers? Then do what is right, and they will praise you. 4 The ruler is God’s servant to help you. But if you do wrong, then be afraid. He has the power to punish; he is God’s servant to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must yield to the government, not only because you might be punished, but because you know it is right.

6 This is also why you pay taxes. Rulers are working for God and give their time to their work. 7 Pay everyone, then, what you owe. If you owe any kind of tax, pay it. Show respect and honor to them all.

Considering I am a lapsed Catholic at best, throwing scripture at me isn't really going to work. And while Paul does tend to write as an authoritarian, one really can take it as support of government in general, which at the time was rather limited, if heavy handed. I would think Paul would look upon our current progressive's desire to regulate every facet of someone's life with scorn.

And some cocksuckers on a city council are not my "rulers". We have evolved past the point of rule by one or by few.

 

[Syriusly]

Where does the 1st Amendment say that a person doesn't have to follow the law if he think his faith say otherwise?

The 1st amendment prevents the government from making laws that infringe on free exercise of religion. Like any right, it has limits, but those limits must be for a compelling government interest and then any remedy must be narrowly tailored to meet that interest.

Some guy selling apples who doesn't want SSM weddings taking place on his property is not a compelling government interest.

This might surprise you- but I actually agree with you on this. In this case.

Of course if the farmer actually followed the Bible- he would obey the law.

"Render unto Caesar" does not mean follow laws you think are wrong or immoral. And he followed the part of the law that was actually applicable to his actions in the jurisdiction to the letter.

Tell me what part of what Paul said here says 'except what laws you think are wrong or immoral'?

Romans 13New Century Version (NCV)
Christians Should Obey the Law
13 All of you must yield to the government rulers. No one rules unless God has given him the power to rule, and no one rules now without that power from God. 2 So those who are against the government are really against what God has commanded. And they will bring punishment on themselves. 3 Those who do right do not have to fear the rulers; only those who do wrong fear them. Do you want to be unafraid of the rulers? Then do what is right, and they will praise you. 4 The ruler is God’s servant to help you. But if you do wrong, then be afraid. He has the power to punish; he is God’s servant to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must yield to the government, not only because you might be punished, but because you know it is right.

6 This is also why you pay taxes. Rulers are working for God and give their time to their work. 7 Pay everyone, then, what you owe. If you owe any kind of tax, pay it. Show respect and honor to them all.

Considering I am a lapsed Catholic at best, throwing scripture at me isn't really going to work. And while Paul does tend to write as an authoritarian, one really can take it as support of government in general, which at the time was rather limited, if heavy handed. I would think Paul would look upon our current progressive's desire to regulate every facet of someone's life with scorn.

And some cocksuckers on a city council are not my "rulers". We have evolved past the point of rule by one or by few.

See, I provide this quote for my own amusement. Because I agree with you in part- certainly I agree that Christians should consider the Bible's advice based upon our 'evolution' in thinking.

But we have Christian's who claim that they can't- because of what the Bible says- provide a service to a same gender couple that wants to get married. The same Bible that says in very plain language 'you must yield to the government'- because government is God's servant.

Those Christians want the Bible to be 'unevolved' when it comes to marriage- but 'evolved' when it comes to obeying the law.

 

[martybegan]

The 1st amendment prevents the government from making laws that infringe on free exercise of religion. Like any right, it has limits, but those limits must be for a compelling government interest and then any remedy must be narrowly tailored to meet that interest.

Some guy selling apples who doesn't want SSM weddings taking place on his property is not a compelling government interest.

This might surprise you- but I actually agree with you on this. In this case.

Of course if the farmer actually followed the Bible- he would obey the law.

"Render unto Caesar" does not mean follow laws you think are wrong or immoral. And he followed the part of the law that was actually applicable to his actions in the jurisdiction to the letter.

Tell me what part of what Paul said here says 'except what laws you think are wrong or immoral'?

Romans 13New Century Version (NCV)
Christians Should Obey the Law
13 All of you must yield to the government rulers. No one rules unless God has given him the power to rule, and no one rules now without that power from God. 2 So those who are against the government are really against what God has commanded. And they will bring punishment on themselves. 3 Those who do right do not have to fear the rulers; only those who do wrong fear them. Do you want to be unafraid of the rulers? Then do what is right, and they will praise you. 4 The ruler is God’s servant to help you. But if you do wrong, then be afraid. He has the power to punish; he is God’s servant to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must yield to the government, not only because you might be punished, but because you know it is right.

6 This is also why you pay taxes. Rulers are working for God and give their time to their work. 7 Pay everyone, then, what you owe. If you owe any kind of tax, pay it. Show respect and honor to them all.

Considering I am a lapsed Catholic at best, throwing scripture at me isn't really going to work. And while Paul does tend to write as an authoritarian, one really can take it as support of government in general, which at the time was rather limited, if heavy handed. I would think Paul would look upon our current progressive's desire to regulate every facet of someone's life with scorn.

And some cocksuckers on a city council are not my "rulers". We have evolved past the point of rule by one or by few.

See, I provide this quote for my own amusement. Because I agree with you in part- certainly I agree that Christians should consider the Bible's advice based upon our 'evolution' in thinking.

But we have Christian's who claim that they can't- because of what the Bible says- provide a service to a same gender couple that wants to get married. The same Bible that says in very plain language 'you must yield to the government'- because government is God's servant.

Those Christians want the Bible to be 'unevolved' when it comes to marriage- but 'evolved' when it comes to obeying the law.

Considering its not up to government or me and you to decide how a person interprets or lives their religion, I really don't care how this farmer resolves the conflict. I guess it comes from not being an insane progressive busybody.

What I care about is the rule of law, properly applied in a constitutionally directed limited federal system of government.

East Lansing is doing something I don't like, something I feel violates not only the concept of home rule, but of 1st amendment freedoms as well.

 

[Syriusly]

This might surprise you- but I actually agree with you on this. In this case.

Of course if the farmer actually followed the Bible- he would obey the law.

"Render unto Caesar" does not mean follow laws you think are wrong or immoral. And he followed the part of the law that was actually applicable to his actions in the jurisdiction to the letter.

Tell me what part of what Paul said here says 'except what laws you think are wrong or immoral'?

Romans 13New Century Version (NCV)
Christians Should Obey the Law
13 All of you must yield to the government rulers. No one rules unless God has given him the power to rule, and no one rules now without that power from God. 2 So those who are against the government are really against what God has commanded. And they will bring punishment on themselves. 3 Those who do right do not have to fear the rulers; only those who do wrong fear them. Do you want to be unafraid of the rulers? Then do what is right, and they will praise you. 4 The ruler is God’s servant to help you. But if you do wrong, then be afraid. He has the power to punish; he is God’s servant to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must yield to the government, not only because you might be punished, but because you know it is right.

6 This is also why you pay taxes. Rulers are working for God and give their time to their work. 7 Pay everyone, then, what you owe. If you owe any kind of tax, pay it. Show respect and honor to them all.

Considering I am a lapsed Catholic at best, throwing scripture at me isn't really going to work. And while Paul does tend to write as an authoritarian, one really can take it as support of government in general, which at the time was rather limited, if heavy handed. I would think Paul would look upon our current progressive's desire to regulate every facet of someone's life with scorn.

And some cocksuckers on a city council are not my "rulers". We have evolved past the point of rule by one or by few.

See, I provide this quote for my own amusement. Because I agree with you in part- certainly I agree that Christians should consider the Bible's advice based upon our 'evolution' in thinking.

But we have Christian's who claim that they can't- because of what the Bible says- provide a service to a same gender couple that wants to get married. The same Bible that says in very plain language 'you must yield to the government'- because government is God's servant.

Those Christians want the Bible to be 'unevolved' when it comes to marriage- but 'evolved' when it comes to obeying the law.

Considering its not up to government or me and you to decide how a person interprets or lives their religion, I really don't care how this farmer resolves the conflict. I guess it comes from not being an insane progressive busybody.

What I care about is the rule of law, properly applied in a constitutionally directed limited federal system of government.

East Lansing is doing something I don't like, something I feel violates not only the concept of home rule, but of 1st amendment freedoms as well.

In this specific case, I agree with you- it is over reach.

But certainly if anyone wants to claim that they don't have to follow the law because of their religious beliefs- then discussing those religious beliefs is fair game.

 

[martybegan]

"Render unto Caesar" does not mean follow laws you think are wrong or immoral. And he followed the part of the law that was actually applicable to his actions in the jurisdiction to the letter.

Tell me what part of what Paul said here says 'except what laws you think are wrong or immoral'?

Romans 13New Century Version (NCV)
Christians Should Obey the Law
13 All of you must yield to the government rulers. No one rules unless God has given him the power to rule, and no one rules now without that power from God. 2 So those who are against the government are really against what God has commanded. And they will bring punishment on themselves. 3 Those who do right do not have to fear the rulers; only those who do wrong fear them. Do you want to be unafraid of the rulers? Then do what is right, and they will praise you. 4 The ruler is God’s servant to help you. But if you do wrong, then be afraid. He has the power to punish; he is God’s servant to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must yield to the government, not only because you might be punished, but because you know it is right.

6 This is also why you pay taxes. Rulers are working for God and give their time to their work. 7 Pay everyone, then, what you owe. If you owe any kind of tax, pay it. Show respect and honor to them all.

Considering I am a lapsed Catholic at best, throwing scripture at me isn't really going to work. And while Paul does tend to write as an authoritarian, one really can take it as support of government in general, which at the time was rather limited, if heavy handed. I would think Paul would look upon our current progressive's desire to regulate every facet of someone's life with scorn.

And some cocksuckers on a city council are not my "rulers". We have evolved past the point of rule by one or by few.

See, I provide this quote for my own amusement. Because I agree with you in part- certainly I agree that Christians should consider the Bible's advice based upon our 'evolution' in thinking.

But we have Christian's who claim that they can't- because of what the Bible says- provide a service to a same gender couple that wants to get married. The same Bible that says in very plain language 'you must yield to the government'- because government is God's servant.

Those Christians want the Bible to be 'unevolved' when it comes to marriage- but 'evolved' when it comes to obeying the law.

Considering its not up to government or me and you to decide how a person interprets or lives their religion, I really don't care how this farmer resolves the conflict. I guess it comes from not being an insane progressive busybody.

What I care about is the rule of law, properly applied in a constitutionally directed limited federal system of government.

East Lansing is doing something I don't like, something I feel violates not only the concept of home rule, but of 1st amendment freedoms as well.

In this specific case, I agree with you- it is over reach.

But certainly if anyone wants to claim that they don't have to follow the law because of their religious beliefs- then discussing those religious beliefs is fair game.

It's less not following the law, and more that the law shouldn't be in place to start with. Or at least the law should take into account issues of religious freedom, property rights, and individual liberty.

MLK's religious beliefs played a part in his breaking laws and going to jail for them. The difference between current protesters and him is that his methods REQUIRED his arrest, and repeat offending to shame the system into changing. Today's protesters of both sides don't seem to often have the stomach for it.