Discussion in 'Current Events' started by MindWars, Dec 1, 2017.
How did he know the two he refused to serve were gay?
The gay wedding cake had to be a clue.
LOL you're floundering badly
'Derrida writes in "Faith and Knowledge" that "more than One is at once more than two." This originary dissemination of others can never be mastered by any politics or ethics. Rather, it opens the space and time for all kinds of violence, dramatically abbreviated by Derrida as "perjury. lies, remote-controlled murder, ordered at a distance even when it rapes and kills with bare hands." Such threats of violence cannot be eliminated -- since they are concomitant with the very possibility of relations -- but can only be mitigated in essentially precarious processes of negotiation.'
(Radical Atheism, pp.99-100)
The deviant sexual practices which align themselves with the christian trinity (females thinking of themselves as male homosexuals) are trumped by the law that permits celibate same-sex marriages.
I think the court would be opening a huge can of worms
The decision cannot just be about religious objection to gay marriage. It would have to apply to all religious objections in the workplace and in business
God does not have cake baking laws dumbass
As you cannot answer questions, you say others are "floundering". Again, if he knows parties have the same address, he can infer premarital sex. He had no way of knowing the men were engaging in sexual acts, only that they were gay. Will he refuse to bake cakes, or sell them, to unmarried persons residing together?
The bakers were not judging the couple, they were refusing to commit a sin themselves.
Which sin is that?
Separate names with a comma.