Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Bleipriester]

Perhaps, they can establish their own religion. Christianity and homosexuality are incompatible.

This is unsurprisingly ignorant.

The vast majority of gay Americans are Christian, and you're in no position to determine if gay Christians are in compliance with their faith.

You cannot pound a butt and be a Christian. You cannot have sex without marriage in Christianity. Homosexuals cannot marry in Christianity. If you are tolerant, you tolerate Christianity as it is.

Bullshit there have been gay Christians since the religion was invented. Christianity is not tolerant or accepting.
I should say faux Christianity isn't.

"Christianity is not tolerant"
You cannot change the terms of a religion. Once the gays have created their "Christian" gay sect, they can marry in the name of that sect.

again why not you asshats do it constantly. argumentum ad populum does not fly.

?

 

[Silhouette]

Then you acknowledge that your 'genetic minority' claim isn't accurate. As there are numerous non 'genetic minorities' that protected by PA laws. Including all heterosexuals, at least in those states that protect sexual orientation.

I've been wondering how long you were going to take to get the church of LGBT tax-exempt status.

Two problems.

One......there is no 'church of LGBT'. You're hallucinating again. Please take your medication.

Two......that's an absolute non-sequitur. Having nothing to do with what you're replying to.

Your claim was that "non-genetic minorities" (LGBT..etc. behaviors) are deserving to be protected by PA laws. My response was that the only way a behavior can be a protected class is if it's a recognized religion. It was spot on point. So the next question that begged was "when will the cult of LGBT be applying for tax-exempt status; given that they have a dogma, they evangelize to the young, and they swiftly punish heretics"?

Spot on topic Skylar.

 

[Silhouette]

I submit this thread is a duplicate of the other one exactly like it, only with a poll worded so it makes it look like one is assenting to "Christians are breaking the law if they refuse to accomodate gay weddings". That law has not been decided yet and in 35 some states, a Christian refusing to accomodate a gay wedding IS legal...since gay marriage is not. Check back with me on that one in a couple weeks here..

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

SILHOUETTE SAID:

"I submit this thread is a duplicate of the other one exactly like it, only with a poll worded so it makes it look like one is assenting to "Christians are breaking the law if they refuse to accomodate gay weddings". That law has not been decided yet and in 35 some states, a Christian refusing to accomodate a gay wedding IS legal...since gay marriage is not. Check back with me on that one in a couple weeks here.".

Wrong.

If a business owner in a state or jurisdiction subject to a public accommodations law that has a provision prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation indeed discriminates against a gay patron, that business owner can be subject to a civil suit to enjoin him from engaging in such discrimination, whether or not the business owner's state is in compliance with the 14th Amendment allowing same-sex couples to marry.

 

[Silhouette]

SILHOUETTE SAID:

"I submit this thread is a duplicate of the other one exactly like it, only with a poll worded so it makes it look like one is assenting to "Christians are breaking the law if they refuse to accomodate gay weddings". That law has not been decided yet and in 35 some states, a Christian refusing to accomodate a gay wedding IS legal...since gay marriage is not. Check back with me on that one in a couple weeks here.".

Wrong.

If a business owner in a state or jurisdiction subject to a public accommodations law that has a provision prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation indeed discriminates against a gay patron, that business owner can be subject to a civil suit to enjoin him from engaging in such discrimination, whether or not the business owner's state is in compliance with the 14th Amendment allowing same-sex couples to marry.

1. Race: a static state of being. 2. Gender: a static state of being. 3. Country/ethnicity of origin: a static state of being 4. Religion: a post-natal belief system: not a static state of being.

LGBT: not a static state of being. So, either you are saying LGBT is religion-like (a cult) and I would agree. Or you are saying that a brand new category of "some minor deviant sex behaviors that change back and forth and are fluid with time" to the 14th Amendment. So which is it? Tax exempt as a quasi-religion or a new category for the 14th (that would be then poised to unravel local governance at its core when a minority gets to deny the majority the ability to regulate behaviors locally)?

 

[Unkotare]

You cite the Bible when you should be reading the Constitution.

Done both frequently.

Apparently not at the appropriate time.

More subjective faux reasoning

You waste no time going to the white flag. Try thinking more carefully in the first place.

what imaginary white flag would that be?
what and when something is appropriate is completely subjective.
end of story.

You mention the Bible when the operative document is the Constitution in a laughably obvious attempt at obfuscation.

 

[daws101]

This is unsurprisingly ignorant.

The vast majority of gay Americans are Christian, and you're in no position to determine if gay Christians are in compliance with their faith.

You cannot pound a butt and be a Christian. You cannot have sex without marriage in Christianity. Homosexuals cannot marry in Christianity. If you are tolerant, you tolerate Christianity as it is.

Bullshit there have been gay Christians since the religion was invented. Christianity is not tolerant or accepting.
I should say faux Christianity isn't.

"Christianity is not tolerant"
You cannot change the terms of a religion. Once the gays have created their "Christian" gay sect, they can marry in the name of that sect.

again why not you asshats do it constantly. argumentum ad populum does not fly.

?

ignorant as well as homophobic ..

 

[daws101]

Done both frequently.

Apparently not at the appropriate time.

More subjective faux reasoning

You waste no time going to the white flag. Try thinking more carefully in the first place.

what imaginary white flag would that be?
what and when something is appropriate is completely subjective.
end of story.

You mention the Bible when the operative document is the Constitution in a laughably obvious attempt at obfuscation.

false!

 

[daws101]

I submit this thread is a duplicate of the other one exactly like it, only with a poll worded so it makes it look like one is assenting to "Christians are breaking the law if they refuse to accomodate gay weddings". That law has not been decided yet and in 35 some states, a Christian refusing to accomodate a gay wedding IS legal...since gay marriage is not. Check back with me on that one in a couple weeks here..

 

[daws101]

SILHOUETTE SAID:

"I submit this thread is a duplicate of the other one exactly like it, only with a poll worded so it makes it look like one is assenting to "Christians are breaking the law if they refuse to accomodate gay weddings". That law has not been decided yet and in 35 some states, a Christian refusing to accomodate a gay wedding IS legal...since gay marriage is not. Check back with me on that one in a couple weeks here.".

Wrong.

If a business owner in a state or jurisdiction subject to a public accommodations law that has a provision prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation indeed discriminates against a gay patron, that business owner can be subject to a civil suit to enjoin him from engaging in such discrimination, whether or not the business owner's state is in compliance with the 14th Amendment allowing same-sex couples to marry.

1. Race: a static state of being. 2. Gender: a static state of being. 3. Country/ethnicity of origin: a static state of being 4. Religion: a post-natal belief system: not a static state of being.

LGBT: not a static state of being. So, either you are saying LGBT is religion-like (a cult) and I would agree. Or you are saying that a brand new category of "some minor deviant sex behaviors that change back and forth and are fluid with time" to the 14th Amendment. So which is it? Tax exempt as a quasi-religion or a new category for the 14th (that would be then poised to unravel local governance at its core when a minority gets to deny the majority the ability to regulate behaviors locally)?

SILHOUETTE SAID:

"I submit this thread is a duplicate of the other one exactly like it, only with a poll worded so it makes it look like one is assenting to "Christians are breaking the law if they refuse to accomodate gay weddings". That law has not been decided yet and in 35 some states, a Christian refusing to accomodate a gay wedding IS legal...since gay marriage is not. Check back with me on that one in a couple weeks here.".

Wrong.

If a business owner in a state or jurisdiction subject to a public accommodations law that has a provision prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation indeed discriminates against a gay patron, that business owner can be subject to a civil suit to enjoin him from engaging in such discrimination, whether or not the business owner's state is in compliance with the 14th Amendment allowing same-sex couples to marry.

1. Race: a static state of being. 2. Gender: a static state of being. 3. Country/ethnicity of origin: a static state of being 4. Religion: a post-natal belief system: not a static state of being.

LGBT: not a static state of being. So, either you are saying LGBT is religion-like (a cult) and I would agree. Or you are saying that a brand new category of "some minor deviant sex behaviors that change back and forth and are fluid with time" to the 14th Amendment. So which is it? Tax exempt as a quasi-religion or a new category for the 14th (that would be then poised to unravel local governance at its core when a minority gets to deny the majority the ability to regulate behaviors locally)?

 

[Silhouette]

Did you get that? If you have an opposing view to Hitler, you're actually "a closet Nazi". Didn't realize logic worked that way. But hey, coming from the cult that believes "it's normal and sane" to amputate your genitals to play-act the opposite gender...well...it all sort of fits really..

 

[JakeStarkey]

LGBT is as wired as straight sexual orientation.

 

[Bleipriester]

You cannot pound a butt and be a Christian. You cannot have sex without marriage in Christianity. Homosexuals cannot marry in Christianity. If you are tolerant, you tolerate Christianity as it is.

Bullshit there have been gay Christians since the religion was invented. Christianity is not tolerant or accepting.
I should say faux Christianity isn't.

"Christianity is not tolerant"
You cannot change the terms of a religion. Once the gays have created their "Christian" gay sect, they can marry in the name of that sect.

again why not you asshats do it constantly. argumentum ad populum does not fly.

?

ignorant as well as homophobic ..

When it comes to gays that want to impose their worldview onto others, I may be "ignorant as well as homophobic". On the other hand, I am not telling you what to do.

 

[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 church or other place of worship should be forced to accommodate for weddings of any kind.

 

[Unkotare]

Apparently not at the appropriate time.

More subjective faux reasoning

You waste no time going to the white flag. Try thinking more carefully in the first place.

what imaginary white flag would that be?
what and when something is appropriate is completely subjective.
end of story.

You mention the Bible when the operative document is the Constitution in a laughably obvious attempt at obfuscation.

false!

Laughably obvious.

 

[Syriusly]

Did you get that? If you have an opposing view to Hitler, you're actually "a closet Nazi". Didn't realize logic worked that way. But hey, coming from the cult that believes "it's normal and sane" to amputate your genitals to play-act the opposite gender...well...it all sort of fits really..

You are a homophobic bigot.

You constantly post with the sole purpose of attacking homosexuals.

You aren't a closet anything- you are just an open homophobic bigot.

 

[Syriusly]

Then you acknowledge that your 'genetic minority' claim isn't accurate. As there are numerous non 'genetic minorities' that protected by PA laws. Including all heterosexuals, at least in those states that protect sexual orientation.

I've been wondering how long you were going to take to get the church of LGBT tax-exempt status.

Two problems.

One......there is no 'church of LGBT'. You're hallucinating again. Please take your medication.

Two......that's an absolute non-sequitur. Having nothing to do with what you're replying to.

Your claim was that "non-genetic minorities" (LGBT..etc. behaviors) are deserving to be protected by PA laws. My response was that the only way a behavior can be a protected class is if it's a recognized religion.

Then again your responses are complete whack.

We protect minority groups who have been attacked in the past for who they are- whether or not who they are is genetic, or passed on by parentage or by choice is immaterial.

You only object when homosexuals are protected.

Because- and only because they are homosexuals- and you want to encourage attacks on homosexuals.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Long gay thread here!

Check this out.

Charity and Sylvia The Remarkable Story of How Two Women Married Each Other in Early America Brain Pickings

It seems gay Americans have been getting married since the beginning.

Freak out, nutters.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Long gay thread here!

Check this out.

Charity and Sylvia The Remarkable Story of How Two Women Married Each Other in Early America Brain Pickings

It seems gay Americans have been getting married since the beginning.

Freak out, nutters.

Thank you.

That was quite touching and a part of history that should be documented.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Long gay thread here!

Check this out.

Charity and Sylvia The Remarkable Story of How Two Women Married Each Other in Early America Brain Pickings

It seems gay Americans have been getting married since the beginning.

Freak out, nutters.

Thank you.

That was quite touching and a part of history that should be documented.

Learned about it from a great podcast. "Ben Franklin's World". It offers a very in depth look at early American history. The kind of shit liberals like to listen to.

Ben Franklin s World - A Podcast About Early American History

Enjoy.