Baker must make gay cakes

[Pop23]

Exactly. You can't use religion as a means to discriminate, especially when it is based solely on animus and not a belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Dogs can't enter into a contract.

They do make really cool posters of dogs playing Poker, but it ain't real, it's comedy, and comedy is protected free speech.

Gays can't enter into a Civil Marriage Contract in Colorado either.



>>>>

But they can in a church. A private contract is still a contract

And two dogs marrying, when neither can enter into any contract is parody.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It certainly is a SINGULAR "faith", yes.

It is hilarious that you libs are supporting and using as an example a judges opinion that compared queer weddings with the marriage of dogs.

The Court noted the claims of Phillips' faith are open to question, at best.

Then the court is an ass and a fool. There is no doubt about the meaning of the first chapter of Romans nor the intent of the world wide Body of Christ regarding faggotry, regardless of what damage is done against morality here in the US.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Exactly. You can't use religion as a means to discriminate, especially when it is based solely on animus and not a belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Dogs can't enter into a contract.



They do make really cool posters of dogs playing Poker, but it ain't real, it's comedy, and comedy is protected free speech.

Marriage is not a legal contract for gays in Colorado either. Their marriage is no more legal in CO than the dogs.

And this is where most Christians would like to help homosexuals to gain legal status for their relationships; civil unions yes, but marriage no.

But the militants have to have a wedge issue that divides their flock from the masses, and they now have it. This is designed to remain a controversy with no resolution ever.

 

[Seawytch]

Dogs can't enter into a contract.



They do make really cool posters of dogs playing Poker, but it ain't real, it's comedy, and comedy is protected free speech.

Gays can't enter into a Civil Marriage Contract in Colorado either.







>>>>

But they can in a church. A private contract is still a contract



And two dogs marrying, when neither can enter into any contract is parody.

You are, again (or should I say as usual) wrong. A church wedding is not a civil contract.

The judge, rightfully, pointed out that the baker is a bigot that was discriminating bases on animus, not deeply held religious beliefs.

 

[Pop23]

Exactly. You can't use religion as a means to discriminate, especially when it is based solely on animus and not a belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.

Dogs can't enter into a contract.



They do make really cool posters of dogs playing Poker, but it ain't real, it's comedy, and comedy is protected free speech.

Marriage is not a legal contract for gays in Colorado either. Their marriage is no more legal in CO than the dogs.

Ask the throuple if the private portion of their marriage contract(s) is/are legal and get back to me. K?

Then find a lawyer and ask if two dogs can enter into a legally binding contract.

 

[Seawytch]

Dogs can't enter into a contract.







They do make really cool posters of dogs playing Poker, but it ain't real, it's comedy, and comedy is protected free speech.

Marriage is not a legal contract for gays in Colorado either. Their marriage is no more legal in CO than the dogs.

And this is where most Christians would like to help homosexuals to gain legal status for their relationships; civil unions yes, but marriage no.



But the militants have to have a wedge issue that divides their flock from the masses, and they now have it. This is designed to remain a controversy with no resolution ever.

Yes, the militant right that said no to civil unions as well as marriage in their amendments and anti gay laws.

We will now take civil unions for all or no one. If you get civil marriage, I do too.

 

[Pop23]

Gays can't enter into a Civil Marriage Contract in Colorado either.







>>>>

But they can in a church. A private contract is still a contract



And two dogs marrying, when neither can enter into any contract is parody.

You are, again (or should I say as usual) wrong. A church wedding is not a civil contract.

The judge, rightfully, pointed out that the baker is a bigot that was discriminating bases on animus, not deeply held religious beliefs.

They may sign whatever documents they care to, binding themselves to one another and call it whatever they choose, before , during or after the ceremony.

Dogs can't.

Man you are desperate.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Gays can't enter into a Civil Marriage Contract in Colorado either.
>>>>

But they can in a church. A private contract is still a contract
And two dogs marrying, when neither can enter into any contract is parody.

You are, again (or should I say as usual) wrong. A church wedding is not a civil contract.

He didn't say it was a civil contract, you ******* retard.

The judge, rightfully, pointed out that the baker is a bigot that was discriminating bases on animus, not deeply held religious beliefs.

And he is a hateful bigot himself by dismissing as mere animus 4000 years of Judeo-Christian belief that homosexuality is immoral and ungodly.

 

[Seawytch]

Dogs can't enter into a contract.







They do make really cool posters of dogs playing Poker, but it ain't real, it's comedy, and comedy is protected free speech.

Marriage is not a legal contract for gays in Colorado either. Their marriage is no more legal in CO than the dogs.

Ask the throuple if the private portion of their marriage contract(s) is/are legal and get back to me. K?



Then find a lawyer and ask if two dogs can enter into a legally binding contract.

Fact: gays cannot get a civil marriage license in CO...just like the dogs the bigot baker made a wedding cake for.

 

[Seawytch]

But they can in a church. A private contract is still a contract

And two dogs marrying, when neither can enter into any contract is parody.

You are, again (or should I say as usual) wrong. A church wedding is not a civil contract.

He didn't say it was a civil contract, you ******* retard.

The judge, rightfully, pointed out that the baker is a bigot that was discriminating bases on animus, not deeply held religious beliefs.

And he is a hateful bigot himself by dismissing as mere animus 4000 years of Judeo-Christian belief that homosexuality is immoral and ungodly.

A will is not a marriage license. A church wedding grants NO legal protections. The baker is a hypocrite, not deeply religious.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Marriage is not a legal contract for gays in Colorado either. Their marriage is no more legal in CO than the dogs.

And this is where most Christians would like to help homosexuals to gain legal status for their relationships; civil unions yes, but marriage no.

But the militants have to have a wedge issue that divides their flock from the masses, and they now have it. This is designed to remain a controversy with no resolution ever.

Yes, the militant right that said no to civil unions as well as marriage in their amendments and anti gay laws.

We will now take civil unions for all or no one. If you get civil marriage, I do too.

Well, then you guys missed your chance to drive that wedge between the far right and the rest of us, instead you have it striking the far left and its pop culture morons vrs the rest of us.

But God is not mocked. Demographics will win in the end as Truth always does.

There have been dozens of movements in the last 2000 years that have aimed their polemical guns at the Church that Christ built, and all have been thrown into the trash bin of history, and today's pop culture is no different.

 

[Pop23]

Marriage is not a legal contract for gays in Colorado either. Their marriage is no more legal in CO than the dogs.

Ask the throuple if the private portion of their marriage contract(s) is/are legal and get back to me. K?



Then find a lawyer and ask if two dogs can enter into a legally binding contract.

Fact: gays cannot get a civil marriage license in CO...just like the dogs the bigot baker made a wedding cake for.

Dogs can't get private or civil or enter into a contract of any type.

Get it

It's a parody.

Kinda like you.

 

[Seawytch]

But they can in a church. A private contract is still a contract







And two dogs marrying, when neither can enter into any contract is parody.

You are, again (or should I say as usual) wrong. A church wedding is not a civil contract.



The judge, rightfully, pointed out that the baker is a bigot that was discriminating bases on animus, not deeply held religious beliefs.

They may sign whatever documents they care to, binding themselves to one another and call it whatever they choose, before , during or after the ceremony.



Dogs can't.



Man you are desperate.

No, bigots are desperate...which is why they are trying to hide behind their religion.

Jesus would not approve.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/02/26/3333161/religious-liberty-racist-anti-gay/

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are, again (or should I say as usual) wrong. A church wedding is not a civil contract.

He didn't say it was a civil contract, you ******* retard.

The judge, rightfully, pointed out that the baker is a bigot that was discriminating bases on animus, not deeply held religious beliefs.

And he is a hateful bigot himself by dismissing as mere animus 4000 years of Judeo-Christian belief that homosexuality is immoral and ungodly.

A will is not a marriage license. A church wedding grants NO legal protections.

One cannot enter into a private contract that has some form of recognition by the government?

Bah, then it is truly a fucked up situation.

But that should be reparable by civil union contracts, no?

No need to drag in moral institutions like marriage if you truly want contractual protections by the state.

The baker is a hypocrite, not deeply religious.

I think his willingness to suffer loss and jail says otherwise.

 

[Seawytch]

Ask the throuple if the private portion of their marriage contract(s) is/are legal and get back to me. K?







Then find a lawyer and ask if two dogs can enter into a legally binding contract.

Fact: gays cannot get a civil marriage license in CO...just like the dogs the bigot baker made a wedding cake for.

Dogs can't get private or civil or enter into a contract of any type.



Get it



It's a parody.



Kinda like you.

Again so? Those are not a marriage..which is what the bigot claimed to be opposed to for gays (because marriage is between a man and a woman) but baked a cake for a dog wedding. The baker won't bake a will cake for gays?

 

[Pop23]

He didn't say it was a civil contract, you ******* retard.









And he is a hateful bigot himself by dismissing as mere animus 4000 years of Judeo-Christian belief that homosexuality is immoral and ungodly.

A will is not a marriage license. A church wedding grants NO legal protections.

One cannot enter into a private contract that has some form of recognition by the government?

Bah, then it is truly a fucked up situation.

But that should be reparable by civil union contracts, no?

No need to drag in moral institutions like marriage if you truly want contractual protections by the state.

The baker is a hypocrite, not deeply religious.

I think his willingness to suffer loss and jail says otherwise.

The "Throuple" (Google it, fascinating stuff, having trophy babies to boot) proves they can bind together without the drama.

But their obsession won't allow that.

 

[Seawytch]

He didn't say it was a civil contract, you ******* retard.



















And he is a hateful bigot himself by dismissing as mere animus 4000 years of Judeo-Christian belief that homosexuality is immoral and ungodly.

A will is not a marriage license. A church wedding grants NO legal protections.

One cannot enter into a private contract that has some form of recognition by the government?



Bah, then it is truly a fucked up situation.



But that should be reparable by civil union contracts, no?



No need to drag in moral institutions like marriage if you truly want contractual protections by the state.

The baker is a hypocrite, not deeply religious.

I think his willingness to suffer loss and jail says otherwise.

Just shows he's very committed to bigotry, not Jesus.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You are, again (or should I say as usual) wrong. A church wedding is not a civil contract.



The judge, rightfully, pointed out that the baker is a bigot that was discriminating bases on animus, not deeply held religious beliefs.

They may sign whatever documents they care to, binding themselves to one another and call it whatever they choose, before , during or after the ceremony.



Dogs can't.



Man you are desperate.

No, bigots are desperate...which is why they are trying to hide behind their religion.

Jesus would not approve.

When 'Religious Liberty' Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia | ThinkProgress

From Romans chapter 1, the very first letter of church law written by an apostle and given prominence before all other epistles as being so basic and essential to Christian faith.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality,[c] wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving,[d] unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.


You militant gays are warring against 2000 years of church belief that is set in unquestionable text.

You will lose and those who support you will suffer for that as time and the whims of the masses are fickle, but God's Word is not and it triumphs over time in every case.

Just ask the 'scientific' Soviet Union or the Thousand Year Nazis Reich.

You cannot win; nature itself is against you.

 

[Pop23]

Fact: gays cannot get a civil marriage license in CO...just like the dogs the bigot baker made a wedding cake for.

Dogs can't get private or civil or enter into a contract of any type.



Get it



It's a parody.



Kinda like you.

Again so? Those are not a marriage..which is what the bigot claimed to be opposed to for gays (because marriage is between a man and a woman) but baked a cake for a dog wedding. The baker won't bake a will cake for gays?

The bigot is nature, yell at it.

 

[JimBowie1958]

A will is not a marriage license. A church wedding grants NO legal protections.

One cannot enter into a private contract that has some form of recognition by the government?



Bah, then it is truly a fucked up situation.



But that should be reparable by civil union contracts, no?



No need to drag in moral institutions like marriage if you truly want contractual protections by the state.

The baker is a hypocrite, not deeply religious.

I think his willingness to suffer loss and jail says otherwise.

Just shows he's very committed to bigotry, not Jesus.

Bullshit; mere bigots are not willing to go to jail for their bigotry, which is why the KKK rolled up like a grub eaten lawn once the FBI started throwing them into jail.

But in the end, you will lose this fight, and in your heart of hearts you know it to be true.