Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[mdk]

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you.

Trying to make children a qualifier for objections to gay "marriage"?

It's wrong just by itself. Sucking innocent children into your crazy world only ensures eternal condemnation.

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you

You missed the point. Children being victimized by homo marriage is a separate issue. Homo marriage by itself is wrong.

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

Legally speaking, the writing is on the wall. The debate amongst the citizens will happen for years to come.

 

[toxicmedia]

Trying to make children a qualifier for objections to gay "marriage"?

It's wrong just by itself. Sucking innocent children into your crazy world only ensures eternal condemnation.

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you

You missed the point. Children being victimized by homo marriage is a separate issue. Homo marriage by itself is wrong.

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

Legally speaking, the writing is on the wall. The debate amongst the citizens will happen for years to come.

Some people seem oblivious to the fact that the GOP has declared gay marriage a complete loss for them.

There are fewer and fewer carrying the torch for intolerant prudish bible thumpers.

I hope they all die soon.

 

[Skylar]

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you.

Trying to make children a qualifier for objections to gay "marriage"?

It's wrong just by itself. Sucking innocent children into your crazy world only ensures eternal condemnation.

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you

You missed the point. Children being victimized by homo marriage is a separate issue. Homo marriage by itself is wrong.

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

You're not making legal arguments. You're making religious ones. Which are as irrelevant to legal proceedings as you can get

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Two women marrying means deviants. It doesn't have to involve sex.

What they do in their bedroom is none of your business. You're making their sex life your issue unnecessarily. There's no biblical requirement that you involve yourself in other people's sex life. Nor any commandment that you don't sell homosexuals cake.

You've imagined all of it. You just don't like gays. And you don't have to like them. You do have to treat them fairly and equally if you're doing business with the public.

Actually, what faggots do in their bedroom IS everyone else's business? Why? Because they've shoved their lifestyle down everyone's throats. It's in every sector of society, even in football. You people are not that important.

Wow, I take back any respect I might have had for anything you might say

Oh....HUGE loss!

If ever I get the respect of Leftists, I need to revisit my strategy.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you

You missed the point. Children being victimized by homo marriage is a separate issue. Homo marriage by itself is wrong.

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

Legally speaking, the writing is on the wall. The debate amongst the citizens will happen for years to come.

Some people seem oblivious to the fact that the GOP has declared gay marriage a complete loss for them.

There are fewer and fewer carrying the torch for intolerant prudish bible thumpers.

I hope they all die soon.

You hope people die soon? Any more Leftist "tolerance" you want to share?

 

[Skylar]

Two women marrying means deviants. It doesn't have to involve sex.

What they do in their bedroom is none of your business. You're making their sex life your issue unnecessarily. There's no biblical requirement that you involve yourself in other people's sex life. Nor any commandment that you don't sell homosexuals cake.

You've imagined all of it. You just don't like gays. And you don't have to like them. You do have to treat them fairly and equally if you're doing business with the public.

Actually, what faggots do in their bedroom IS everyone else's business? Why? Because they've shoved their lifestyle down everyone's throats. It's in every sector of society, even in football. You people are not that important.

And by 'shoving it down everyone's throats', you mean merely *existing*? They've done nothing to you. You've suffered no losses because the rights of gays are recognized. Your marriage is in no way impacted.

And yet you're bending over backwards to portray yourself as some victim. You're not. Nothing has happened to you.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Trying to make children a qualifier for objections to gay "marriage"?

It's wrong just by itself. Sucking innocent children into your crazy world only ensures eternal condemnation.

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you

You missed the point. Children being victimized by homo marriage is a separate issue. Homo marriage by itself is wrong.

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

You're not making legal arguments. You're making religious ones. Which are as irrelevant to legal proceedings as you can get

Actually I've made several legal arguments, lengthy ones, to parry your idiotic assertion that somewhere in the Constitution is a "right" to butt sex marriage.

Good memory, 50 first dates!

 

[Katzndogz]

The pool of civilization has been poisoned.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Two women marrying means deviants. It doesn't have to involve sex.

What they do in their bedroom is none of your business. You're making their sex life your issue unnecessarily. There's no biblical requirement that you involve yourself in other people's sex life. Nor any commandment that you don't sell homosexuals cake.

You've imagined all of it. You just don't like gays. And you don't have to like them. You do have to treat them fairly and equally if you're doing business with the public.

Actually, what faggots do in their bedroom IS everyone else's business? Why? Because they've shoved their lifestyle down everyone's throats. It's in every sector of society, even in football. You people are not that important.

And by 'shoving it down everyone's throats', you mean merely *existing*? They've done nothing to you. You've suffered no losses because the rights of gays are recognized. Your marriage is in no way impacted.

And yet you're bending over backwards to portray yourself as some victim. You're not. Nothing has happened to you.

No, I mean shoving it down everyone's throats. When businesses are forced to bend over to give them special rights in the workplace, when football players gain notoriety for "coming out" instead of achieving athletic excellence, when bakers and photographers are forced to cater to gay marriages and pastors are forced to conduct them, when schools start pushing gay propaganda on children, and when there's no place in life where we don't hear about the gay agenda being pushed on us, that means it's being shoved down our throats.

Nobody cared what you faggots did in your bedroom until you made it our business, so on behalf of America, **** YOU!

 

[Skylar]

What children?

Once again- our wedding cake didn't say a word about children on it.

Nor has any baker who has objected to baking cakes for gay couples mentioned children as the reason.

Just you

You missed the point. Children being victimized by homo marriage is a separate issue. Homo marriage by itself is wrong.

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

You're not making legal arguments. You're making religious ones. Which are as irrelevant to legal proceedings as you can get

Actually I've made several legal arguments, lengthy ones, to parry your idiotic assertion that somewhere in the Constitution is a "right" to butt sex marriage.

Not lately, you haven't. You pretty much abandoned those poorly thought through legal arguments days ago. And well you should have.....they were born of some profound misunderstandings of the role of the judiciary, a startling lack of understanding of the difference between rights and laws, and a stark misinterpretation of the first section of the 14th amendment.

You're making religiously based value judgements now, backed by your own personal opinions.

Which are legally irrelevant.

 

[Skylar]

No, I mean shoving it down everyone's throats. When businesses are forced to bend over to give them special rights in the workplace

What 'special rights' are you referring to? The right to marry isn't particularly special. Equal and fair treatment in business isn't particularly special. Its actually pretty baseline.

So what are you referring to?

when football players gain notoriety for "coming out" instead of achieving athletic excellence

And how were you even remotely injured by this? How were you harmed? What was taken from you?

This is the part I don't get. You squeal like a struck cat because a foot ball player came out. But what relevance does it have to your life? What cost did you have to pay?

Nothing.

when bakers and photographers are forced to cater to gay marriages and pastors are forced to conduct them

They're not forced. They can refuse and pay the appropriate fines based on the public accommodation laws of their states. 'We don't serve your kind here' may have been a popular approach for your ilk in the 50 and 60s, but its not a valid basis of business conduct in many States.

Following some pretty basic laws that require folks to trreat their customers with minimum levels of equality and fairness isn't 'shoving' anything down your throat. Its treating you like everyone else. You're demanding special rights. And society has generally said no.

As for pastors being forced to conduct gay weddings, you may want to check that again. I think you're describing your fears rather than the actual reality.

, when schools start pushing gay propaganda on children

And by gay propaganda, you mean not threatening them with 'rampages' as you have? Not telling gays to 'sit down and shut up' or they're going to get a 'war that will make hate crimes seem like sunday brunch'?

The lack of hateful threats of violence, murder and oppression isn't 'propaganda'.

Nobody cared what you faggots did in your bedroom until you made it our business, so on behalf of America, **** YOU!

You're not 'America', you get that right? Because gay marriage is enjoying a 12 to 19 point lead in support among actual Americans. And growing. With Gallup recording the highest support ever for gay marriage, with a solid 55% of Americans behind it. You know....the majority.

You may be confusing your personal and irrational enmity of gays with the sentiment of the general population. 'Even Jesus went on a rampage' may be your solution for interacting with gays. But for most folks, treating them like everyone else is a much more useful approach.

But take heart. Most folks that think like you are ebbing toward their dirt nap, with the simple attrition of age gratefully taking the sharper edges of your kind of bigotry with it.

 

[Skylar]

Some people seem oblivious to the fact that the GOP has declared gay marriage a complete loss for them.

Science long ago recognized that Marriage is the natural result of human physiology, wherein one man joins with one woman; further recognizing that a person who accepts that which demonstrably deviates from the biological norm, thus that which is deviant, as normal, such an individual is delusional... and where a sufficient sum of individuals accepts such, the culture which they represent is likewise delusional and to that culture, viability is lost.

That's not marriage. That's *******.

Marriage is a social construct of our own invention. And it is whatever we say it is. As all the infertile and childless couples being allowed to marry or stay married demonstrate, there's clearly a valid basis of marriage that has nothing to do with children or the ability to have them.

As for your claims that gays are 'delusional', that would be you citing yourself. Not science. And you're nobody.

You can pretend that the rejection of the acceptance of sexual abnormality is a function of religion, it is science which proves that such is deviant and it is science which proves that accepting such is foolish.

Apparently your go to 'Appeals to Authority' of 'god' and 'nature' weren't working out too well. So you've awkwardly tried to appropriate science as your new 'god'.

Your tired fallacy of logic doesn't work any better with a new name than it did the old. You have no logical or rational basis to deny gays their right to marry. You simply have the desire to.

That's not good enough.

 

[toxicmedia]

You missed the point. Children being victimized by homo marriage is a separate issue. Homo marriage by itself is wrong.

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

Legally speaking, the writing is on the wall. The debate amongst the citizens will happen for years to come.

Some people seem oblivious to the fact that the GOP has declared gay marriage a complete loss for them.

There are fewer and fewer carrying the torch for intolerant prudish bible thumpers.

I hope they all die soon.

You hope people die soon? Any more Leftist "tolerance" you want to share?

Those who dedicate themselves to hating gays aren't people

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

You have every right to believe gay marriage is wrong. Despite your objections and hand-wringing gays will continue to marry.

Not necessarily. You may fantasize that the debate has been settled, but legally speaking, it hasn't.

Legally speaking, the writing is on the wall. The debate amongst the citizens will happen for years to come.

Some people seem oblivious to the fact that the GOP has declared gay marriage a complete loss for them.

There are fewer and fewer carrying the torch for intolerant prudish bible thumpers.

I hope they all die soon.

You hope people die soon? Any more Leftist "tolerance" you want to share?

Those who dedicate themselves to hating gays aren't people

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Some people seem oblivious to the fact that the GOP has declared gay marriage a complete loss for them.

Science long ago recognized that Marriage is the natural result of human physiology, wherein one man joins with one woman; further recognizing that a person who accepts that which demonstrably deviates from the biological norm, thus that which is deviant, as normal, such an individual is delusional... and where a sufficient sum of individuals accepts such, the culture which they represent is likewise delusional and to that culture, viability is lost.

You can pretend that the rejection of the acceptance of sexual abnormality is a function of religion, it is science which proves that such is deviant and it is science which proves that accepting such is foolish.

So your ***** is with science... *****.

 

[Silhouette]

Those who dedicate themselves to hating gays aren't people

You're close. Saintmichael isn't against gays. S/he is one playing the role of a "gay hater" using abusive language to spark sympathy for his crowd. It's a theater act.

 

[Skylar]

Some people seem oblivious to the fact that the GOP has declared gay marriage a complete loss for them.

Science long ago recognized that Marriage is the natural result of human physiology, wherein one man joins with one woman;

Science has long since recognize that reproduction is a natural result of intercourse between reproductively viable men and women.

Marriage is a social construct, not a scientific one. And it is whatever we say it is. Some societies have recognized marriage as between one man and one woman. Others, one man and 4 women. Others, one man, one woman, or one man, one man or one woman, one woman.

As a social construct, we can make it whatever we want it to be.

further recognizing that a person who accepts that which demonstrably deviates from the biological norm thus that which is deviant, as normal, such an individual is delusional

That's not science. That's just you citing yourself. Which is meaningless.

.. and where a sufficient sum of individuals accepts such, the culture which they represent is likewise delusional and to that culture, viability is lost.

Given that gays are about 1.5%-3% of the population, we're no where near your 'sufficient sum'. You're offering us a slippery slope fallacy. And a pretty stupid one.

You can pretend that the rejection of the acceptance of sexual abnormality is a function of religion, it is science which proves that such is deviant and it is science which proves that accepting such is foolish.

You're just offering us yet another variant on the same Appeal to Authority fallacy. Where you can't offer us a logic or rational reason why your position is valid. So you insist its valid because an 'authority' says it is. First 'god, then 'nature'....with your new god being 'science'.

Same fallacy, different authority. And no logic or reason behind your claims in any case.

 

[beagle9]

Muslim cabbies in Minnesota claimed accepting fares from people carrying booze, drunks, or dogs would violate their religious beliefs. The state ordered them to do so regardless because they were violation of the state's PA laws.

So you have without realizing it, just affirmed what I just said...that your cult is gearing up to sue churches to force them to perform gay weddings. You will no doubt also be gearing up to sue islamics to perform gay weddings in mosques? No?.

Homosexuals are not like your cult of homophobes.

Nobody is proposing to sue churches- and any idiot who does will be laughed out of court- whether he sues to make a church marry an African American, a Jew or a homosexual.

Not sue, but they are willing to ask that someone be fired in a heart beat, if they don't tow the line after they are asked about what they think of gay people or the gay lifestyle. The contestant for Mrs. America knows all about that one because she was attempted to be fired because of her opinion given when asked, and so does Phil of Duck Dynasty along with The former Chic-Filet CEO, and the baker, the photographer and so on and so forth. Now whats the difference in being sued as opposed to the attempt by the militants to oust one from their business or in the stopping of their ability to do business in America any longer and/or for ones business to be shut down in America all because of ? Is there a difference ? I don't see one... Oh and how did the cabbies become an issue in which you described about them ? Will the state or government enforcers finally be won over by such groups completely soon, and therefore the proceedings would then start immediately on attacking those who would try and separate themselves from the promoting of very bad sinful lifestyles in which goes directly against their faith or religious beliefs in this nation ? Look at what has happened in the last 30 years, and where the attacks on Christianity in the public square has gone. NO NATIVITY SCENES, NO TEN COMMANDMENTS POSTED, NO PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RECITED, NO BOY SCOUTS OR RATHER THAT BOY SCOUTS NEED TO EXCEPT GAY SCOUT MASTERS, NO CROSS IN THE MILITARY CEMETERY, AND ON AND ON IT ALL KEEPS ON GOING. I think many of these issues have been dragged before the courts also, so don't tell us that something won't happen, when we know by proof of that things will happen sooner or later on such issues, and they will be dragged before the court when they happen.

No one is fooled by progressives here, and what they want for America to be like for them in the coming future, so I don't know why you all don't know this by now.

 

[toxicmedia]

Muslim cabbies in Minnesota claimed accepting fares from people carrying booze, drunks, or dogs would violate their religious beliefs. The state ordered them to do so regardless because they were violation of the state's PA laws.

So you have without realizing it, just affirmed what I just said...that your cult is gearing up to sue churches to force them to perform gay weddings. You will no doubt also be gearing up to sue islamics to perform gay weddings in mosques? No?.

Homosexuals are not like your cult of homophobes.

Nobody is proposing to sue churches- and any idiot who does will be laughed out of court- whether he sues to make a church marry an African American, a Jew or a homosexual.

Not sue, but they are willing to ask that someone be fired in a heart beat, if they don't tow the line after they are asked about what they think of gay people or the gay lifestyle. The contestant for Mrs. America knows all about that one because she was attempted to be fired because of her opinion given when asked, and so does Phil of Duck Dynasty along with The former Chic-Filet CEO, and the baker, the photographer and so on and so forth. Now whats the difference in being sued as opposed to the attempt by the militants to oust one from their business or in the stopping of their ability to do business in America any longer and/or for ones business to be shut down in America all because of ? Is there a difference ? I don't see one... Oh and how did the cabbies become an issue in which you described about them ? Will the state or government enforcers finally be won over by such groups completely soon, and therefore the proceedings would then start immediately on attacking those who would try and separate themselves from the promoting of very bad sinful lifestyles in which goes directly against their faith or religious beliefs in this nation ? Look at what has happened in the last 30 years, and where the attacks on Christianity in the public square has gone. NO NATIVITY SCENES, NO TEN COMMANDMENTS POSTED, NO PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RECITED, NO BOY SCOUTS OR RATHER THAT BOY SCOUTS NEED TO EXCEPT GAY SCOUT MASTERS, NO CROSS IN THE MILITARY CEMETERY, AND ON AND ON IT ALL KEEPS ON GOING. I think many of these issues have been dragged before the courts also, so don't tell us that something won't happen, when we know by proof of that things will happen sooner or later on such issues, and they will be dragged before the court when they happen.

No one is fooled by progressives here, and what they want for America to be like for them in the coming future, so I don't know why you all don't know this by now.

I find it interesting how complicated arguments agains being gay, or gays getting married, can become.

For me it's quite simple.

What gays do...in terms of getting married, just living together, or kissing in public...doesn't have any physical or financial effect on the institution of man/woman only marriages, or those who oppose it.

Gay marriage, is a truly eroding vestigal social taboo that has roots in very primitaive behavior, and practiced by those who embrace their version of "tradition" over human compassion.

 

[Silhouette]

Look at what has happened in the last 30 years, and where the attacks on Christianity in the public square has gone. NO NATIVITY SCENES, NO TEN COMMANDMENTS POSTED, NO PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE RECITED, NO BOY SCOUTS OR RATHER THAT BOY SCOUTS NEED TO EXCEPT GAY SCOUT MASTERS, NO CROSS IN THE MILITARY CEMETERY, AND ON AND ON IT ALL KEEPS ON GOING. I think many of these issues have been dragged before the courts also, so don't tell us that something won't happen, when we know by proof of that things will happen sooner or later on such issues, and they will be dragged before the court when they happen.

No one is fooled by progressives here, and what they want for America to be like for them in the coming future, so I don't know why you all don't know this by now.

Agreed. And perhaps it wouldn't even be so terrible if those requesting that suppression of freedom of expression of one's religion were merely atheist secularists. But they're not. They have a religion of their own: it is the religion of those against religion. They have a rigid dogma "oppose all expressions of the sublime faiths" and "turn a blind eye when its demonic, indulgent or promotes deviant sexuality". That religion is A-OK and always allowed, even naked, gyrating down main street in front of kids...

It is the war of one faith "The church of LGBT" waged against those that are diametrically opposed to it. One church's dogma is selfishness, physical pleasures, excess and aggression. The others, much older (or perhaps formed way back because of the first always finding a way to rear its head in successive generations to the ruin of various civilizations) teach altruism, self moderation/restraint/humility.

Since the two are diametrically opposed on nearly every form of principles, they are at war. And currently we are letting the faith of the beast take the lead. This was forbidden in Jude 1. And those who pretend like it is anything but what it is will be going to the same place as those in the beast-faith.