Southern Baptist head vows never to perform same-sex unions

[PratchettFan]

agree with your post statement , hope that it stays that way PRATCHET !!

Now where would the fun be in that?

 

[pismoe]

well , when you are correct , well , you are correct Pratchet !!

 

[paddymurphy]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

If PA laws can be used to force a Christian baker to make a "gay wedding cake", how is it that we legally sift this person's faith out from a minister who performs marriages? If the minister or the church take money for weddings performed to any person outside their parish, they are providing a public service. PA laws would apply just the same to any member of a church. Being a minister taking money for public commerce outside the fold puts him immediately on legal par with the Christian baker.

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. It is a fucking cake, period. Baking a cake is not a religious exercise. Performing a marriage is. I know that you idiots think that if you keep lying and claiming that people will be forced to attend or officiate gay marriages, more will oppose marriage equality, but it ain't working. Support for marriage equality grows with every new poll. You lost this fight. Accept it and move on.

 

[pismoe]

shouldn't have to bake a 'gay' wedding cake if you don't want to , shouldn't have to rent a private apartment or hotel room [yada yada yada] to someone that you don't want to either Paddy . Gov. should be 'Forced' to accommodate all Americans but private business should be free to act / discriminate as they like . Just my statement / comment !!

 

[Political Junky]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

If PA laws can be used to force a Christian baker to make a "gay wedding cake", how is it that we legally sift this person's faith out from a minister who performs marriages? If the minister or the church take money for weddings performed to any person outside their parish, they are providing a public service. PA laws would apply just the same to any member of a church. Being a minister taking money for public commerce outside the fold puts him immediately on legal par with the Christian baker.

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. It is a fucking cake, period. Baking a cake is not a religious exercise. Performing a marriage is. I know that you idiots think that if you keep lying and claiming that people will be forced to attend or officiate gay marriages, more will oppose marriage equality, but it ain't working. Support for marriage equality grows with every new poll. You lost this fight. Accept it and move on.

Those, like the Reverend in the OP, continue to get money by making such claims.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

If PA laws can be used to force a Christian baker to make a "gay wedding cake", how is it that we legally sift this person's faith out from a minister who performs marriages? If the minister or the church take money for weddings performed to any person outside their parish, they are providing a public service. PA laws would apply just the same to any member of a church. Being a minister taking money for public commerce outside the fold puts him immediately on legal par with the Christian baker.

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. It is a fucking cake, period. Baking a cake is not a religious exercise. Performing a marriage is. I know that you idiots think that if you keep lying and claiming that people will be forced to attend or officiate gay marriages, more will oppose marriage equality, but it ain't working. Support for marriage equality grows with every new poll. You lost this fight. Accept it and move on.

Two fairy fine fellers go to a baker and ask the baker make them a cake for their wedding it's a GAY wedding cake, moron

 

[Bonzi]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

(1) God created woman for man.
(2) God said men laying with men was an abomination in his sight
(3) Because people in the Bible (God fearing men like David) had many wives, didn't make it right.

Next...?

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

 

[PratchettFan]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

If PA laws can be used to force a Christian baker to make a "gay wedding cake", how is it that we legally sift this person's faith out from a minister who performs marriages? If the minister or the church take money for weddings performed to any person outside their parish, they are providing a public service. PA laws would apply just the same to any member of a church. Being a minister taking money for public commerce outside the fold puts him immediately on legal par with the Christian baker.

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. It is a fucking cake, period. Baking a cake is not a religious exercise. Performing a marriage is. I know that you idiots think that if you keep lying and claiming that people will be forced to attend or officiate gay marriages, more will oppose marriage equality, but it ain't working. Support for marriage equality grows with every new poll. You lost this fight. Accept it and move on.

Two fairy fine fellers go to a baker and ask the baker make them a cake for their wedding it's a GAY wedding cake, moron

If they buy a car, is it a GAY car?

 

[paddymurphy]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

If PA laws can be used to force a Christian baker to make a "gay wedding cake", how is it that we legally sift this person's faith out from a minister who performs marriages? If the minister or the church take money for weddings performed to any person outside their parish, they are providing a public service. PA laws would apply just the same to any member of a church. Being a minister taking money for public commerce outside the fold puts him immediately on legal par with the Christian baker.

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. It is a fucking cake, period. Baking a cake is not a religious exercise. Performing a marriage is. I know that you idiots think that if you keep lying and claiming that people will be forced to attend or officiate gay marriages, more will oppose marriage equality, but it ain't working. Support for marriage equality grows with every new poll. You lost this fight. Accept it and move on.

Two fairy fine fellers go to a baker and ask the baker make them a cake for their wedding it's a GAY wedding cake, moron

No, it is a cake.

 

[PratchettFan]

shouldn't have to bake a 'gay' wedding cake if you don't want to , shouldn't have to rent a private apartment or hotel room [yada yada yada] to someone that you don't want to either Paddy . Gov. should be 'Forced' to accommodate all Americans but private business should be free to act / discriminate as they like . Just my statement / comment !!

We've tried that. It doesn't work well.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

If PA laws can be used to force a Christian baker to make a "gay wedding cake", how is it that we legally sift this person's faith out from a minister who performs marriages? If the minister or the church take money for weddings performed to any person outside their parish, they are providing a public service. PA laws would apply just the same to any member of a church. Being a minister taking money for public commerce outside the fold puts him immediately on legal par with the Christian baker.

There is no such thing as a gay wedding cake. It is a fucking cake, period. Baking a cake is not a religious exercise. Performing a marriage is. I know that you idiots think that if you keep lying and claiming that people will be forced to attend or officiate gay marriages, more will oppose marriage equality, but it ain't working. Support for marriage equality grows with every new poll. You lost this fight. Accept it and move on.

Two fairy fine fellers go to a baker and ask the baker make them a cake for their wedding it's a GAY wedding cake, moron

No, it is a cake.

A homo cake

 

[paddymurphy]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

(1) God created woman for man.
(2) God said men laying with men was an abomination in his sight
(3) Because people in the Bible (God fearing men like David) had many wives, didn't make it right.

Next...?

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

 

[Bonzi]

GOOD. Because you can't make him.

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

(1) God created woman for man.
(2) God said men laying with men was an abomination in his sight
(3) Because people in the Bible (God fearing men like David) had many wives, didn't make it right.

Next...?

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

I think there is too much in the Bible that points to the fact that God hates all sexual sin, which includes men with men and women with women. From God creating woman for man.... to several references throughout the Bible stating that men with men is an abomination, detestable etc. to God. Not just one place.

What do you care what I believe anyway... ?

 

[paddymurphy]

He knows he can't be made to, but many of those he speaks to don't know.
Also, the highlighted quote is bullshit. When did God call for marriage between one man and one woman? The Bible is full of men with hundreds or thousands of wives and whores, not to mention incest,

(1) God created woman for man.
(2) God said men laying with men was an abomination in his sight
(3) Because people in the Bible (God fearing men like David) had many wives, didn't make it right.

Next...?

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

I think there is too much in the Bible that points to the fact that God hates all sexual sin, which includes men with men and women with women. From God creating woman for man.... to several references throughout the Bible stating that men with men is an abomination, detestable etc. to God. Not just one place.

What do you care what I believe anyway... ?

There are not several references, there is the one in leviticus and biblical scholars familiar with the languages agree that it is far from clear that the passage was a reference to homosexuality. More importantly, the bible is a book written by men; men imbued with the ignorance and prejudices of the times they lived in.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

(1) God created woman for man.
(2) God said men laying with men was an abomination in his sight
(3) Because people in the Bible (God fearing men like David) had many wives, didn't make it right.

Next...?

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

I think there is too much in the Bible that points to the fact that God hates all sexual sin, which includes men with men and women with women. From God creating woman for man.... to several references throughout the Bible stating that men with men is an abomination, detestable etc. to God. Not just one place.

What do you care what I believe anyway... ?

There are not several references, there is the one in leviticus and biblical scholars familiar with the languages agree that it is far from clear that the passage was a reference to homosexuality. More importantly, the bible is a book written by men; men imbued with the ignorance and prejudices of the times they lived in.

There are at least six references. Try actually reading the bible before looking foolish

 

[Bonzi]

(1) God created woman for man.
(2) God said men laying with men was an abomination in his sight
(3) Because people in the Bible (God fearing men like David) had many wives, didn't make it right.

Next...?

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

I think there is too much in the Bible that points to the fact that God hates all sexual sin, which includes men with men and women with women. From God creating woman for man.... to several references throughout the Bible stating that men with men is an abomination, detestable etc. to God. Not just one place.

What do you care what I believe anyway... ?

There are not several references, there is the one in leviticus and biblical scholars familiar with the languages agree that it is far from clear that the passage was a reference to homosexuality. More importantly, the bible is a book written by men; men imbued with the ignorance and prejudices of the times they lived in.

The Bible is a large book, historically accurate, and, if you have faith that God inspired the written word and, if you are born of the Spirit, you would know it to be true.

You can call it brainwashing, stupidity whatever, and that's fine, but there are people much more knowledgeable that can make this case better than I can. I think most people (including you) that hear this, know in their inner-core, it's the truth and the only truth that matters in life....

 

[pismoe]

not interested in Efficiency , interest is Freedom , especially when it concern privately owned property Pratchet !!

 

[paddymurphy]

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

I think there is too much in the Bible that points to the fact that God hates all sexual sin, which includes men with men and women with women. From God creating woman for man.... to several references throughout the Bible stating that men with men is an abomination, detestable etc. to God. Not just one place.

What do you care what I believe anyway... ?

There are not several references, there is the one in leviticus and biblical scholars familiar with the languages agree that it is far from clear that the passage was a reference to homosexuality. More importantly, the bible is a book written by men; men imbued with the ignorance and prejudices of the times they lived in.

The Bible is a large book, historically accurate, and, if you have faith that God inspired the written word and, if you are born of the Spirit, you would know it to be true.

You can call it brainwashing, stupidity whatever, and that's fine, but there are people much more knowledgeable that can make this case better than I can. I think most people (including you) that hear this, know in their inner-core, it's the truth and the only truth that matters in life....

As a Catholic, I know that the bible is not historically accurate. There was no whale that swallowed Jonah, there was not actual Garden of Eden with two human beings, one created from mud and one from the others rib; there was no great flood. You don;t know it is what you claim, you believe it to be. That is fine, for you. But do not cite to your beliefs as justification for laws that govern those who do not believe as you do.

 

[paddymurphy]

Next? You have no idea what God said. Did you hear his or her voice? No.

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

I think there is too much in the Bible that points to the fact that God hates all sexual sin, which includes men with men and women with women. From God creating woman for man.... to several references throughout the Bible stating that men with men is an abomination, detestable etc. to God. Not just one place.

What do you care what I believe anyway... ?

There are not several references, there is the one in leviticus and biblical scholars familiar with the languages agree that it is far from clear that the passage was a reference to homosexuality. More importantly, the bible is a book written by men; men imbued with the ignorance and prejudices of the times they lived in.

There are at least six references. Try actually reading the bible before looking foolish

Have read it. Have also read from those who study it and the languages it has been written. It does not condemn homosexuality in the new testament at all and, most importantly, the bible is not relevant to any discussion of our laws.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I have read His Word. Yes.

You have read an English translation of a translation from other languages which was itself a written version of oral tales handed down. Did you think there was a stenographer travelling with the Levites who wrote down the rules that include the words you claim, falsely, condemns homosexuality.

I think there is too much in the Bible that points to the fact that God hates all sexual sin, which includes men with men and women with women. From God creating woman for man.... to several references throughout the Bible stating that men with men is an abomination, detestable etc. to God. Not just one place.

What do you care what I believe anyway... ?

There are not several references, there is the one in leviticus and biblical scholars familiar with the languages agree that it is far from clear that the passage was a reference to homosexuality. More importantly, the bible is a book written by men; men imbued with the ignorance and prejudices of the times they lived in.

There are at least six references. Try actually reading the bible before looking foolish

Have read it. Have also read from those who study it and the languages it has been written. It does not condemn homosexuality in the new testament at all and, most importantly, the bible is not relevant to any discussion of our laws.

Yes it does condemn it in the New Testament, Romans 1:26-27, 1st Corinthians 6: 9-10, 1st Timothy 1:9-10....if you don't think the Bible is relevant then stop trying to use it to further your agenda