Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Skylar]

Your arguments are flat.

Skylar lacks the means to reason objectively... thus, truth is foreign to her.

Says you. And every time I challenge your 'objective reasoning', it collapses just before you run.

Yawning....run.

 

[Wry Catcher]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

 

[beagle9]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Now wait a minute here, the gays are the ones making their moves against the Christians in this nation, so how do you speak as if all of a sudden Christians are being bad towards gay people when their not? Christians just want to keep their faith and beliefs intact, but the gays are having none of that anymore.

Funny how this gayism is new in this nation, but the Christians who have been here forever now, are all of a sudden an enemy now in the nation, and this because a new group says so?

 

[Wry Catcher]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Now wait a minute here, the gays are the ones making their moves against the Christians in this nation, so how do you speak as if all of a sudden Christians are being bad towards gay people when their not? Christians just want to keep their faith and beliefs intact, but the gays are having none of that anymore.

Funny how this gayism is new in this nation, but the Christians who have been here forever now, are all of a sudden an enemy now in the nation, and this because a new group says so?

A church or a religious sect may keep their faith and belief intact, the issue is quite simple. If they value their principles, that's fine, but if they allow gay or lesbians to perform their duties, then they ought to pay for the service as do all secular citizens and businesses when they pay their taxes.

 

[Silhouette]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one. I think they'll weigh the public good and make a decision..

Behaviors don't have rights.

 

[Skylar]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

 

[beagle9]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so. The issue is between the Christians having the right to not be involved in something they see as very Sinful, and it is not about blacks or any other desperate attempt by the left to say it is or to add that to it in order to just continually distract with.

 

[Syriusly]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Now wait a minute here, the gays are the ones making their moves against the Christians in this nation, so how do you speak as if all of a sudden Christians are being bad towards gay people when their not? Christians just want to keep their faith and beliefs intact, but the gays are having none of that anymore.

Christians have actively passed laws to prevent gays from marrying. Every single 'anti-gay' marriage law that passed in the last 20 years was passed with the active support of Christian groups and Churches.

Christians haven't just wanted to 'keep their faith and beliefs' intact- before any 'homosexuals' sued any Christians for breaking the laws, Christians were busy discriminating against homosexuals.

Only now- when Christians discover that the law applies to them also do they suddenly cry 'discrimination'.

 

[Syriusly]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so. The issue is between the Christians having the right to not be involved in something they see as very Sinful, and it is not about blacks or any other desperate attempt by the left to say it is or to add that to it in order to just continually distract with.

Christians just want exemptions from PA laws so that can discriminate against homosexuals. But they promise they only want to be able to discriminate against homosexuals......

What could be wrong with that?

 

[Syriusly]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one. I think they'll weigh the public good and make a decision...

Oh I think that the Supreme Court will get it right- and you will are going to be screaming 'dictators in black!"

 

[Wry Catcher]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so. The issue is between the Christians having the right to not be involved in something they see as very Sinful, and it is not about blacks or any other desperate attempt by the left to say it is or to add that to it in order to just continually distract with.

Interesting that you claim homosexuality is a sin, and yet claim Christians see it as "very sinful". Who determines what is and what is not a sin? Is it up to the individual Christian or Muslim or Jew or etc.? Or is there a natural law, and if so, are animals who engage in same sex behavior sinners?

If you claim God Himself has expressed homosexuality is a sin, in what manner did He make such a proclamation?

But even if God did have an 11th Commandment (thou shall not ......!) did he believe in organized religious institutions (could they be a form of idolatry?)?

So explain to me why homosexuality is a sin, when the evidence suggests such behavior exists throughout the animal kingdom?

See:

Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality Yale Scientific Magazine

homosexual behavior in animals - Google Scholar

 

[Skylar]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so.

You seem confused. A baker making a cake doesn't have to suck a dick. Or engage in sodomy. Or have any same sex intercourse at all.

They merely make cake.

All the other 'implications' are your imagination. And its that imagination, where a Christian can discriminate based on nothing more than their perception of belief, that is the very wholesale dismantling of all discrimination law that you say you're not looking for. But actively call for.....with the applicability of law being based solely on any given Christian's perception of their own faith.

Nope. We're not doing that.

If a Christian's faith makes their profession impossible, find a new profession. As your faith is yours. And its your responsibility to find a job that matches your faith. Not our job to change our laws to match your religion.

 

[Skylar]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so. The issue is between the Christians having the right to not be involved in something they see as very Sinful, and it is not about blacks or any other desperate attempt by the left to say it is or to add that to it in order to just continually distract with.

Christians just want exemptions from PA laws so that can discriminate against homosexuals. But they promise they only want to be able to discriminate against homosexuals......

What could be wrong with that?

I mean, its not like religion has been used to justify OTHER heinous shit in history.

"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

Judge Leon Bazile ruling against Richard and Mildred Loving

We should just trust them. As they promise not to abuse the sweeping authority to invalidate any law on any religious basis they wish.

Honest.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so. The issue is between the Christians having the right to not be involved in something they see as very Sinful, and it is not about blacks or any other desperate attempt by the left to say it is or to add that to it in order to just continually distract with.

Interesting that you claim homosexuality is a sin, and yet claim Christians see it as "very sinful". Who determines what is and what is not a sin? Is it up to the individual Christian or Muslim or Jew or etc.? Or is there a natural law, and if so, are animals who engage in same sex behavior sinners?

If you claim God Himself has expressed homosexuality is a sin, in what manner did He make such a proclamation?

But even if God did have an 11th Commandment (thou shall not ......!) did he believe in organized religious institutions (could they be a form of idolatry?)?

So explain to me why homosexuality is a sin, when the evidence suggests such behavior exists throughout the animal kingdom?

See:

Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality Yale Scientific Magazine

homosexual behavior in animals - Google Scholar

From what I believe, any sin is a sin, from a lie about Santa Clause to homosexual acts, to adultery, and even murder, I believe God sees them all as the same.

It is debatable, to whether homosexuality, by itself, is a sin, for The Bible does say effeminate men, but It does specifically say, im paraphrasing, homosexual acts are a sin.

And God gave man dominion over the animals, comparing how a human being acts to an animal is really grasping at straws, because dogs will eat their own feces on a regular basis, and they will eat each other, does this make it right for a human to eat other humans?

 

[beagle9]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so. The issue is between the Christians having the right to not be involved in something they see as very Sinful, and it is not about blacks or any other desperate attempt by the left to say it is or to add that to it in order to just continually distract with.

Interesting that you claim homosexuality is a sin, and yet claim Christians see it as "very sinful". Who determines what is and what is not a sin? Is it up to the individual Christian or Muslim or Jew or etc.? Or is there a natural law, and if so, are animals who engage in same sex behavior sinners?

If you claim God Himself has expressed homosexuality is a sin, in what manner did He make such a proclamation?

But even if God did have an 11th Commandment (thou shall not ......!) did he believe in organized religious institutions (could they be a form of idolatry?)?

So explain to me why homosexuality is a sin, when the evidence suggests such behavior exists throughout the animal kingdom?

See:

Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality Yale Scientific Magazine

homosexual behavior in animals - Google Scholar

Are you an animal ? If not then act like a human being and quit comparing your life as a human to an animal or is this what homosexuality does to human beings ?

 

[Silhouette]

If a Christian's faith makes their profession impossible, find a new profession. As your faith is yours. And its your responsibility to find a job that matches your faith. Not our job to change our laws to match your religion.

Nope, it's your job to shop around and find someone who is cool with depicting two men on a cake "getting married". Not for a pork eater to sue a kosher deli to serve him pork. Actually it's not a fair comparison. A jew serving pork is a venial sin. Enabling the homosexual culture to take over and redact the word "marriage" is a mortal sin that carries eternity in the pit of fire as the punishment.

No secular law can require a Christian to do that. Think Hobby Lobby.

 

[Skylar]

If a Christian's faith makes their profession impossible, find a new profession. As your faith is yours. And its your responsibility to find a job that matches your faith. Not our job to change our laws to match your religion.

Nope, it's your job to shop around and find someone who is cool with depicting two men on a cake "getting married". Not for a pork eater to sue a kosher deli to serve him pork.

Nope. A cake baker bakes cake. And sells it to customers. A Kosher deli doesn't carry pork. And doesn't sell it to anyone.

Killing your false analogy. As no one is asking a cake baker to do anything beyond the services they advertise: baking cakes.

 

[Silhouette]

If a Christian's faith makes their profession impossible, find a new profession. As your faith is yours. And its your responsibility to find a job that matches your faith. Not our job to change our laws to match your religion.

Nope, it's your job to shop around and find someone who is cool with depicting two men on a cake "getting married". Not for a pork eater to sue a kosher deli to serve him pork.

Nope. A cake baker bakes cake. And sells it to customers. A Kosher deli doesn't carry pork. And doesn't sell it to anyone.

Killing your false analogy. As no one is asking a cake baker to do anything beyond the services they advertise: baking cakes.

They are if they ask them to put two groomsmen on the cake holding hands with a wedding arbor over them and a "bless Adam and Steve's wedding" icing on it.

I say a blank cake fine, as long as the person ordering it doesn't mention that it's for a gay wedding. If they say that, the Christian baker has a right to refuse even then. It's a matter of faith and scripture. They simply CANNOT do such a thing and remain a Christian. It is a de facto forced abdication of their faith at one of its most cherished cores: marriage and family....and by extension...society (Jude 1)

 

[Wry Catcher]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, but with this caveat, those who choose to discriminate need to have their non profit status revoked.

The price of having discriminatory principles in a society which respects cultural pluralism can be high. Since religious organizations accept the tax free services of firefighters, EMT's and Police Officers, each of whom likely has in its corp gay or lesbian employees, and many who use contraceptives, it is hypocritical to claim a faith based objection.

Yes, because butt sex is more important that encouraging religious charity to the public; made possible by tax-exempt status.

I think the US Supreme Court will get it right on this one.

Yeah, but you thought the US Supreme Court was going to overturn gay marriage with their temporary stay for Utah. Your ability to read the Court's intent or predict its action is quite awful. As you keep projecting what you want onto the court. Rather than taking notice of what the evidence suggests.

I'd say its highly unlikely that the courts are going to kick down all anti-discrimination law by giving a broad religious exemption for any form of discrimination.

No one wants to have a broad exemption for all forms of discrimination, and that is just what you try and say it is when it is absolutely not and you know it... All the Christians want is to not have to be involved with the sin of homosexuality, nor to support the sin of homosexuality by their actions in doing so. The issue is between the Christians having the right to not be involved in something they see as very Sinful, and it is not about blacks or any other desperate attempt by the left to say it is or to add that to it in order to just continually distract with.

Interesting that you claim homosexuality is a sin, and yet claim Christians see it as "very sinful". Who determines what is and what is not a sin? Is it up to the individual Christian or Muslim or Jew or etc.? Or is there a natural law, and if so, are animals who engage in same sex behavior sinners?

If you claim God Himself has expressed homosexuality is a sin, in what manner did He make such a proclamation?

But even if God did have an 11th Commandment (thou shall not ......!) did he believe in organized religious institutions (could they be a form of idolatry?)?

So explain to me why homosexuality is a sin, when the evidence suggests such behavior exists throughout the animal kingdom?

See:

Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality Yale Scientific Magazine

homosexual behavior in animals - Google Scholar

Are you an animal ? If not then act like a human being and quit comparing your life as a human to an animal or is this what homosexuality does to human beings ?

I'm am an animal, though I've never ever offered my life as anything other than an intelligent, educated, human being. Do you have any intelligent and non biased questions to ask? Or are you as stupid as your posts suggest?

 

[Skylar]

If a Christian's faith makes their profession impossible, find a new profession. As your faith is yours. And its your responsibility to find a job that matches your faith. Not our job to change our laws to match your religion.

Nope, it's your job to shop around and find someone who is cool with depicting two men on a cake "getting married". Not for a pork eater to sue a kosher deli to serve him pork.

Nope. A cake baker bakes cake. And sells it to customers. A Kosher deli doesn't carry pork. And doesn't sell it to anyone.

Killing your false analogy. As no one is asking a cake baker to do anything beyond the services they advertise: baking cakes.

They are if they ask them to put two groomsmen on the cake holding hands with a wedding arbor over them and a "bless Adam and Steve's wedding" icing on it.

Given that the baker refused to bake any cake, the icing is irrelevant. Cake bakers bake cakes. Ordering a cake from a cake baker isn't unreasonable, extreme, 'cultish' or any of the bizarre words you've awkwardly tried to apply.

PA laws apply to everyone. Including Christians. They don't get to ignore any law they don't like.

They simply CANNOT do such a thing and remain a Christian. It is a de facto forced abdication of their faith at one of its most cherished cores: marriage and family....and by extension...society (Jude 1)

Jude 1 makes no mention of gay marriage, cakes, or any of the other nonsense you've just made up for it. Nor have you once been able to cite any part of Jude 1 that says what you do. You're hallucinating.

Second, if your religion makes it impossible for you to do you job...

....get another job. Matching your profession to your faith is your responsibility. Not ours.