Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[JakeStarkey]

This is not the poster who supposedly said, "The prior poster was suggesting that everyone must follow the laws, because they are the laws." That is a false conclusion to what was said.

I said we are subject to the laws and their consequences.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

If the law says do or don't, and you do the opposite, and the law finds out, yeah, you will pay the price of the law's effects. Tough to be you.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure if the SS came knocking on your door, you would turn over everyone you knew to save your rear, wouldn't you?

If you believe American LEO are similar to the Gestapo, then, you are a fool.

Answer the question.

We all know you can't answer truthfully without showing what kind of person you are, but go ahead, we will wait.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I was asking Jake, I am sure what you would do Androw.

Answered in 2038. American LEO is not the Gestapo, which you well know. Your question is meaningless, but your inference shames American values.

 

[bendog]

I believe he said he wouldn't if it goes against God's law, what part of that did you not understand? He might accept the consequences of the law, but he will not follow it if it conflicts with God's law, and I will say, if it goes against God's law, I to will not follow that man made law.

They had laws in Germany too. The German people followed those laws. Many of them thought the law was wrong, but they still turned the Jews over to the SS. Would you have?

For Christ's sake. Victim much with false equalivancies? LOL

That was a dead on point post. The prior poster was suggesting that everyone must follow the laws, because they are the laws.

The implication is that laws are automatically morally right, and above the laws of G-d.

Yet we have perfectly good examples of laws that were not morally right, and it was good to violate them.

The difference is that those laws are universally considered bad, while the laws in question on this thread, or considered by some to be good.

Not according to our Christian beliefs. Thus we are not wrong in violating them, should they be imposed.

Well we didn't put Jews in ovens here, so pardon me if I call you on your hysteria.

We have had Jim Crowe, and civil disobedience, but I'm pretty much at a loss for any recent comparison ..... unless maybe no equal protection for GLBT folks.

So, what exactly, are the good Christians of America being forced to protect by breaking laws, or are you merely speaking rhetorically? Like the various posters who "cling" to their rifles for the day in which they must rise up to oppose federal tyranny.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

This is what I wanted to hear: "I didn't mean to imply that I wouldn't be punished by the law. I said I wouldn't be changed by the law."

No one cares what you think about it.

Do you understand now.

Wow, you backtrack quick. Glad you finally understand Jake. You don't get to tell churches what goes on in those churches. You don't get to tell anyone how they can act, we all know there will be consequences for every action we take, we don't need you to point that out.

You state the obvious very well!

 

[JakeStarkey]

The issue is that marriage equality will become the law for all.

Tough.

No one is going to force anyone to marry or be married except to the person they want.

No one is going to force churches to marry folks of whom they don't approve, except for the fact of public accommodation laws, which are very easily avoided.

This is a non-issue.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is what I wanted to hear: "I didn't mean to imply that I wouldn't be punished by the law. I said I wouldn't be changed by the law."

No one cares what you think about it.

Do you understand now.

Wow, you backtrack quick. Glad you finally understand Jake. You don't get to tell churches what goes on in those churches. You don't get to tell anyone how they can act, we all know there will be consequences for every action we take, we don't need you to point that out.

You state the obvious very well!

You are the one backtracking on what I said and Androw said. I said he was subject to the law and its effects.

Hint: so are you.

Lying and falsifying helps you not at all.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ulysses and Androw are scampering off with their tails between their legs.

Faux Christians like them are just silly.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

I was asking Jake, I am sure what you would do Androw.

Answered in 2038. American LEO is not the Gestapo, which you well know. Your question is meaningless, but your inference shames American values.

You don't know anything about values, American, Christian or anything else.

Still haven't answered the question. Are you skeered.

 

[bendog]

This is what I wanted to hear: "I didn't mean to imply that I wouldn't be punished by the law. I said I wouldn't be changed by the law."

No one cares what you think about it.

Do you understand now.

Wow, you backtrack quick. Glad you finally understand Jake. You don't get to tell churches what goes on in those churches. You don't get to tell anyone how they can act, we all know there will be consequences for every action we take, we don't need you to point that out.

You state the obvious very well!

No one has ever suggested telling churches what to do inside churches. I think it's pretty clear the Roberts' court would not be amused, nor do I think many GLBT would have any desire to mix with churches that find them less than equal in the eyes of God. However, if a church enters into private commerce by selling or renting to the general public, it's going to be increasingly difficult for them to discriminate.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

Ulysses and Androw are scampering off with their tails between their legs.

Faux Christians like them are just silly.

I aint skeered. Answer the question or HUSH!(that's a polite way of saying SHUT UP)

Would you turn over your friends to an institution like the SS to save your rear? Your children? Your parents?

Can you not answer the question truthfully without shaming yourself in public?

 

[bendog]

Ulysses and Androw are scampering off with their tails between their legs.

Faux Christians like them are just silly.

I aint skeered. Answer the question or HUSH!(that's a polite way of saying SHUT UP)

Would you turn over your friends to an institution like the SS to save your rear? Your children? Your parents?

Can you not answer the question truthfully without shaming yourself in public?

For the love of mercy, it's like Jr. High.

 

[JakeStarkey]

U and A sound as silly as a son of mine did when he was a fourteen year old and decided not to go to church anymore.

I told him that was his choice but he had to certain chores to do that had to be finished by noon each Sunday.

He said 'no'.

I forfeited his allowance.

He said 'no.'

I took 10% of his saving as a fine and divided it in the savings of his siblings.

He finally said 'yes'.

A and U can do what they want, but there always consequences for such nonsense.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ulysses and Androw are scampering off with their tails between their legs.

Faux Christians like them are just silly.

I aint skeered. Answer the question or HUSH!(that's a polite way of saying SHUT UP)

Would you turn over your friends to an institution like the SS to save your rear? Your children? Your parents?

Can you not answer the question truthfully without shaming yourself in public?

For the love of mercy, it's like Jr. High.

Yeah, it is, all the bravado. They sound like 14 year olds. And the question they ask is simple: they would turn in anybody to not be hurt by the SS. You know, "Pastor, sorry about this," says Ulysses, "get your ass in the van."

 

[JakeStarkey]

Maybe they are teenagers on the Board. There are a few, I gather.

 

[bendog]

Churches pay no prop tax. All donations are not only not taxed as income, but actually are tax deductible by the donor. Churches are free to not hire people of other faiths, and actually may refuse to hire because of sexual orientation. (though some gLBt would like that to change, though I doubt it will). Churches are free to marry those who they deem worthy, and to deny those they deem unworthy. Churches are even pretty free to use the pulpit to call a politician a sinner, and even to shun them.

I'm just not seeing the cross that Andrew and Ullyses claim to be nailed upon.

 

[Andylusion]

This is what I wanted to hear: "I didn't mean to imply that I wouldn't be punished by the law. I said I wouldn't be changed by the law."

No one cares what you think about it.

Do you understand now.

That's fine with me. I'm still going to live as my convictions say, and so will thousands of Christians. You think prison overcrowding is a problem now.... You push this, and in the future you'll think todays US incarceration rate is a dream to be achieved.

You will care what we think eventually. Because we're not going to follow laws like this thread pushes.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is what I wanted to hear: "I didn't mean to imply that I wouldn't be punished by the law. I said I wouldn't be changed by the law."

No one cares what you think about it.

Do you understand now.

That's fine with me. I'm still going to live as my convictions say, and so will thousands of Christians. You think prison overcrowding is a problem now.... You push this, and in the future you'll think todays US incarceration rate is a dream to be achieved.

You will care what we think eventually. Because we're not going to follow laws like this thread pushes.

Son, no one is persecuting you for what you believe.

What law? No one thinks churches should or would be forced to marry folks they don't want to marry.

And you certainly not going to make churches and pastors who they can and cannot marry. That would be like U's SS that he loves so much.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Click on the image for a look at how Ulysses and Androw consider the right of Christians to make others do as they want.

 

[Andylusion]

Churches pay no prop tax. All donations are not only not taxed as income, but actually are tax deductible by the donor. Churches are free to not hire people of other faiths, and actually may refuse to hire because of sexual orientation. (though some gLBt would like that to change, though I doubt it will). Churches are free to marry those who they deem worthy, and to deny those they deem unworthy. Churches are even pretty free to use the pulpit to call a politician a sinner, and even to shun them.

I'm just not seeing the cross that Andrew and Ullyses claim to be nailed upon.

Good heavens.... How many times do I have to say this over and over.

The title of the thread is.....

"Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?"

Does it say "Should we repeal laws infringing Religious freedom?"

No, it does not.

That said, there is the case of the Christian owned and operated wedding cake business, and that's the same deal. If I open a shop selling wedding cakes, and a homo couple shows up, they are not getting a cake.

There is nothing you can do to stop me from selling cakes, or refusing customers that are asking me to violate my faith.