What's Christian About Denying Service To Any Individual?

[daws101]

Let me get this straight, you came into a thread about Jesus and complain about people mentioning Jesus, but you aren't offended?

now you're growing some brains.

Mocking you is a sign of intelligence?

Since you missed it, I should point out I mock you almost every time I reply to you.

yes! you fail epically in your attempts to mock me.
not that I don't notice but reacting would give you a false sense that I gave a **** what you think...

 

[alan1]

That posting was undesirable.

So, if a christian fighter pilot is assigned to a two man plane where the other pilot is non-christian and even (gasp!!) gay, the that pilot can decide to eject in mid-flight, amirite? Because his beliefs are more important than the life of his non-christian colleague, right? Remember, the Airforce is SECULAR. Just like the Gubbermint.

Your argument is just totally illogical.

We are talking about Christians conducting SECULAR business. A baker bakes cakes for all sorts of occasions, most of them secular. My G-d, if you Christians are gonna be that picky about your clientele and start judging whether a customer will be served based on your litmus test of them (Lord, what hubris), you may end up seeing lots of starving Christian businessmen who suddenly discover they have no clientele at all. But hey, you will have won the moral battle.

Isn't the choice of whether or not a person chooses to engage in commerce with another person their choice?
I absolutely don't want some government entity forcing me to engage in commerce simply because they think I should.

 

[alan1]

"But a gay person who walks into a bakery or a seamstress shop or a photography shop and wants a product to go with any kind of celebration that he/she plans to celebrate, that person poses absolutely no physical threat to you whatsover and his/her money spends just as well as everyone else's money."

Once a dervish young woman walked into my shop and demanded that I design and sew some satanic symbols to wear on her jacket. I refused to do it and would do so again.

Threatening to close down a community hospital because it will not perform abortions is abhorrent. And using politics to promote anti-Christian practices is a bad idea in some states who feel entitled under the First Amendment to have the right to refuse service to anybody.

You cannot sanitize the gay practice in the eyes of some who may have been forced to have gay sex at an early age by one who was also a pedophile who preyed on young, inexperienced children in particular.

It's an in-your-face sham to force people to work against their consciences. It just is.

The part above in blue.
I'm an atheist, and I think you should do that every time Ms Becki since those are your principles. No government should force you to do otherwise or allow you to be sued for your principles..

 

[Mertex]

There is nothing un-Christian-like in defending ones religion or morals.

You don't defend your morals by pointing out other people's sins. Jesus said "go and sin no more" He didn't say "go and persecute those whom you think are sinners".

Assumption by the OP is that it is not Christian to defend and advocate for ones beliefs.

Being unfair, and discriminating are not Christ-like features. You're misinformed. It is your responsibility to not commit those things which you see as sin....not persecuting others. God didn't give you that mandate.

 

[Mertex]

"But a gay person who walks into a bakery or a seamstress shop or a photography shop and wants a product to go with any kind of celebration that he/she plans to celebrate, that person poses absolutely no physical threat to you whatsover and his/her money spends just as well as everyone else's money."

Once a dervish young woman walked into my shop and demanded that I design and sew some satanic symbols to wear on her jacket. I refused to do it and would do so again.

Threatening to close down a community hospital because it will not perform abortions is abhorrent. And using politics to promote anti-Christian practices is a bad idea in some states who feel entitled under the First Amendment to have the right to refuse service to anybody.

You cannot sanitize the gay practice in the eyes of some who may have been forced to have gay sex at an early age by one who was also a pedophile who preyed on young, inexperienced children in particular.

It's an in-your-face sham to force people to work against their consciences. It just is.

The part above in blue.
I'm an atheist, and I think you should do that every time Ms Becki since those are your principles. No government should force you to do otherwise or allow you to be sued for your principles..

If your state has laws that demand no discrimination based on race or sexual orientation, it would be against the law to refuse someone service based on their race or sexual orientation. I doubt that any state has laws that force you to do business with someone based on something other than race and sexual orientation....so refusing to sew a satanic symbols would not be against the law.

Now the baker who refused to bake a cake for the gay couple, could have said he couldn't have it done in time, or used some other excuse, but that particular state has a law against discrimination based on race and sexual orientation, and the baker was defying it by admitting that he was not doing it because of their sexual orientation. When you break the law, you face the consequences. And if you have a business to serve the public, who all pay taxes, then you should honor your duty as a businessman and serve the public, not just those you think are okay in your opinion. The baker was trying to make a statement, and he lost, because more people are in favor of the law against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Selling them a cake is not going to taint you or make you want to become gay, but some people take their beliefs a bit too far.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is nothing un-Christian-like in defending ones religion or morals.

You don't defend your morals by pointing out other people's sins. Jesus said "go and sin no more" He didn't say "go and persecute those whom you think are sinners".

Why are you pointing at people then?

Assumption by the OP is that it is not Christian to defend and advocate for ones beliefs.

Being unfair, and discriminating are not Christ-like features. You're misinformed. It is your responsibility to not commit those things which you see as sin....not persecuting others. God didn't give you that mandate.

How would you know? I can cite plenty of examples of Jesus telling people that they were wrong, and doing it publicly. He even took a whip to people at one point.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"But a gay person who walks into a bakery or a seamstress shop or a photography shop and wants a product to go with any kind of celebration that he/she plans to celebrate, that person poses absolutely no physical threat to you whatsover and his/her money spends just as well as everyone else's money."

Once a dervish young woman walked into my shop and demanded that I design and sew some satanic symbols to wear on her jacket. I refused to do it and would do so again.

Threatening to close down a community hospital because it will not perform abortions is abhorrent. And using politics to promote anti-Christian practices is a bad idea in some states who feel entitled under the First Amendment to have the right to refuse service to anybody.

You cannot sanitize the gay practice in the eyes of some who may have been forced to have gay sex at an early age by one who was also a pedophile who preyed on young, inexperienced children in particular.

It's an in-your-face sham to force people to work against their consciences. It just is.

The part above in blue.
I'm an atheist, and I think you should do that every time Ms Becki since those are your principles. No government should force you to do otherwise or allow you to be sued for your principles..

If your state has laws that demand no discrimination based on race or sexual orientation, it would be against the law to refuse someone service based on their race or sexual orientation. I doubt that any state has laws that force you to do business with someone based on something other than race and sexual orientation....so refusing to sew a satanic symbols would not be against the law.

Now the baker who refused to bake a cake for the gay couple, could have said he couldn't have it done in time, or used some other excuse, but that particular state has a law against discrimination based on race and sexual orientation, and the baker was defying it by admitting that he was not doing it because of their sexual orientation. When you break the law, you face the consequences. And if you have a business to serve the public, who all pay taxes, then you should honor your duty as a businessman and serve the public, not just those you think are okay in your opinion. The baker was trying to make a statement, and he lost, because more people are in favor of the law against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Selling them a cake is not going to taint you or make you want to become gay, but some people take their beliefs a bit too far.

This thread is not about the law, it is about the misconception that some people are pure enough to tell other people what is right, and what is wrong.

 

[Bumberclyde]

The part above in blue.
I'm an atheist, and I think you should do that every time Ms Becki since those are your principles. No government should force you to do otherwise or allow you to be sued for your principles..

If your state has laws that demand no discrimination based on race or sexual orientation, it would be against the law to refuse someone service based on their race or sexual orientation. I doubt that any state has laws that force you to do business with someone based on something other than race and sexual orientation....so refusing to sew a satanic symbols would not be against the law.

Now the baker who refused to bake a cake for the gay couple, could have said he couldn't have it done in time, or used some other excuse, but that particular state has a law against discrimination based on race and sexual orientation, and the baker was defying it by admitting that he was not doing it because of their sexual orientation. When you break the law, you face the consequences. And if you have a business to serve the public, who all pay taxes, then you should honor your duty as a businessman and serve the public, not just those you think are okay in your opinion. The baker was trying to make a statement, and he lost, because more people are in favor of the law against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Selling them a cake is not going to taint you or make you want to become gay, but some people take their beliefs a bit too far.

This thread is not about the law, it is about the misconception that some people are pure enough to tell other people what is right, and what is wrong.

You're wrong.

It's about how Jesus hated gays, so today's christians can too.

 

[freedombecki]

"But a gay person who walks into a bakery or a seamstress shop or a photography shop and wants a product to go with any kind of celebration that he/she plans to celebrate, that person poses absolutely no physical threat to you whatsover and his/her money spends just as well as everyone else's money."

Once a dervish young woman walked into my shop and demanded that I design and sew some satanic symbols to wear on her jacket. I refused to do it and would do so again.

Threatening to close down a community hospital because it will not perform abortions is abhorrent. And using politics to promote anti-Christian practices is a bad idea in some states who feel entitled under the First Amendment to have the right to refuse service to anybody.

You cannot sanitize the gay practice in the eyes of some who may have been forced to have gay sex at an early age by one who was also a pedophile who preyed on young, inexperienced children in particular.

It's an in-your-face sham to force people to work against their consciences. It just is.

Becki - with all respect to you, no, it is not. It is just plain old silly. And an unwise business practice to boot. But I respect your opinion on this.

I can understand how you might feel that way, but King George of England in 1776 considered Americans so silly he refused them representation in his court, although we had well-educated and prolific correspondents fully capable of observing he most stringent courtesan practices of the day, as well as being highly diplomatic luminaries. Contrary to what poor interpretations have been about our founders, each of them cared deeply for and were ardent Christian men who knew the new and old testaments of the Pilgrims' Bible backward and forward. I'm certain they knew about gay men, but chose not to mention incorrigibles in their polite written works, plus they may have been far more compassionate than any of us knows and willing to look the other way if incorrigibles would leave other people alone and keep their scripturally wrongful practices out of public view. That worked for over 150 years until the falsified work of the Kensey Reports came into public view and flaunted lies as truth in order to upset the civil life of America, which is exactly what happened. None of that changes what the Pilgrim Bible says. Not one single of the report's multiple lies changes one single Old or New Testament precepts of three major world religions (and many others) about eschewing homosexuality as a lifestyle.

In my humble, silly opinion, that is.

 

[Chuckt]

The part above in blue.
I'm an atheist, and I think you should do that every time Ms Becki since those are your principles. No government should force you to do otherwise or allow you to be sued for your principles..

If your state has laws that demand no discrimination based on race or sexual orientation, it would be against the law to refuse someone service based on their race or sexual orientation. I doubt that any state has laws that force you to do business with someone based on something other than race and sexual orientation....so refusing to sew a satanic symbols would not be against the law.

Now the baker who refused to bake a cake for the gay couple, could have said he couldn't have it done in time, or used some other excuse, but that particular state has a law against discrimination based on race and sexual orientation, and the baker was defying it by admitting that he was not doing it because of their sexual orientation. When you break the law, you face the consequences. And if you have a business to serve the public, who all pay taxes, then you should honor your duty as a businessman and serve the public, not just those you think are okay in your opinion. The baker was trying to make a statement, and he lost, because more people are in favor of the law against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Selling them a cake is not going to taint you or make you want to become gay, but some people take their beliefs a bit too far.

This thread is not about the law, it is about the misconception that some people are pure enough to tell other people what is right, and what is wrong.

It is not about being pure enough. It is about being without excuse and knowing better:

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

 

[Nosmo King]

The radical so-called fundamentalists Christians up in Arizona tried to get a law passed that would deny service to people gay or perceived as gay in public and private places of business.

I'd like to know...what's Christlike about that?

What basis, does one build this argument in the first place?

What the radical RW have done in Arizona is prove exactly how UNCHRISTLIKE they really are by trying to pass this law.

Anyone care to show me how that radical bill they were pushing is Christian?

I'd like to know.

One is taught not to enable or support sin. Providing services to a gay wedding is supporting and enabling sin. Marriage means that the State recognizes the two as sexual partners and while being gay is not in and of itself a sin, practicing gay life style and having sex IS.

Shouldn't the business. Repressing rights identify themselves as a Bigoted Business? That way no person could accidentally do business with them if they disagree.

Such Bigoted Businesses must post a sign saying:

Due to our fervent belief in Jesus Christ who preached "Judge not lest ye be judged" and "those without sin cast the first stone", we reserve the right to discriminate against homosexuals"

That way, no 'sinner' would accidentally wander into the shop of such a righteous business owner.

 

[Stephanie]

You notice how they have turned this bill into the homosexual bill and against Christians...

don't we all wish we were so special we can create a huge scene over a damn cake?

 

[Nosmo King]

You notice how they have turned this bill into the homosexual bill and against Christians...

don't we all wish we were so special we can create a huge scene over a damn cake?

As with other civil rights cases, the oppressors paint themselves as the oppressed. The logic is: our rights to be hatful bigots are being repressed! This is so unfair, unjust and unAmerican! The nerve of those (fill in the blank, *******, queers, Irish)! They are asking for 'special rights' and taking our rights to be hateful bigots away!

 

[Katzndogz]

There is a difference between Christians serving sinners and participating in sinfulness themselves. Christians are merely refusing to perform personal services that would require them to commit what they feel are sins.

 

[Mertex]

If your state has laws that demand no discrimination based on race or sexual orientation, it would be against the law to refuse someone service based on their race or sexual orientation. I doubt that any state has laws that force you to do business with someone based on something other than race and sexual orientation....so refusing to sew a satanic symbols would not be against the law.

Now the baker who refused to bake a cake for the gay couple, could have said he couldn't have it done in time, or used some other excuse, but that particular state has a law against discrimination based on race and sexual orientation, and the baker was defying it by admitting that he was not doing it because of their sexual orientation. When you break the law, you face the consequences. And if you have a business to serve the public, who all pay taxes, then you should honor your duty as a businessman and serve the public, not just those you think are okay in your opinion. The baker was trying to make a statement, and he lost, because more people are in favor of the law against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Selling them a cake is not going to taint you or make you want to become gay, but some people take their beliefs a bit too far.

This thread is not about the law, it is about the misconception that some people are pure enough to tell other people what is right, and what is wrong.

It is not about being pure enough. It is about being without excuse and knowing better:

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

And "doing good" is being kind and loving to everyone, and treating them as you would like them to treat you. You cannot win sinners to Christ by discriminating against them and not showing them love. Serving someone we believe may be in sin does not transfer their sin to us.

Ephesians 4:31-32
Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

Galatians 6:1 - Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

Matthew 7:3-5 - And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

 

[Nosmo King]

There is a difference between Christians serving sinners and participating in sinfulness themselves. Christians are merely refusing to perform personal services that would require them to commit what they feel are sins.

How is providing THE SAME SERVICES to heterosexuals as homosexuals committing a sin?

 

[Amelia]

This thread is not about the law, it is about the misconception that some people are pure enough to tell other people what is right, and what is wrong.

It is not about being pure enough. It is about being without excuse and knowing better:

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

And "doing good" is being kind and loving to everyone, and treating them as you would like them to treat you. You cannot win sinners to Christ by discriminating against them and not showing them love. Serving someone we believe may be in sin does not transfer their sin to us.

Ephesians 4:31-32
Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

Galatians 6:1 - Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

Matthew 7:3-5 - And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Being kind should stop short of participating in activities your conscience tells you are sinful.

John 8:1-11

Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.


Christ got the Pharisees not to stone the woman. He didn't get them to help her continue to commit adultery. He told her not to continue in that lifestyle.

Christians shouldn't stone gays -- or revile them or any other unloving thing -- but if they truly believe that gay marriage is wrong it is quite reasonable and not unChristian for them to abstain from helping a gay marriage take place.






P.s., And Muslim barbers shouldn't be forced to cut the hair of women if they feel that is against their religion.

And nuns shouldn't have to pay for birth control.

Et cetera.

 

[Coyote]

The radical so-called fundamentalists Christians up in Arizona tried to get a law passed that would deny service to people gay or perceived as gay in public and private places of business.

I'd like to know...what's Christlike about that?

What basis, does one build this argument in the first place?

What the radical RW have done in Arizona is prove exactly how UNCHRISTLIKE they really are by trying to pass this law.

Anyone care to show me how that radical bill they were pushing is Christian?

I'd like to know.

One is taught not to enable or support sin. Providing services to a gay wedding is supporting and enabling sin. Marriage means that the State recognizes the two as sexual partners and while being gay is not in and of itself a sin, practicing gay life style and having sex IS.

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to a hetero couple where one of the two partners was already unfaithful before the marriage, then they are also supporting that sin as well, right?

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to a smoker or a drinker, they are supporting that sin as well, right?

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to a Jew or a Buddhist or a Hindu for a wedding, they are supporting sin, right?

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to an obese person, they are supporting a sin, right? For obesity is one of the seven deadly sins in the bible..

You see, using your logic, there is practically no one to whom a Christian should be selling wedding cakes.

That line of logic is just batshit crazy.

They pick and choose which sins and/or "abominations" to target. Why is homosexuality more "sinful" than gluttony or greed? Christ's message was always interlaced with compassion over condemnation. That's what made him so revolutionary. The idea that you "hate the sin, but not the sinner". When you have a business that serves the public...how do you pick and choose in a manner that promotes compassion rather than deliberate hurt? I think that would be a key question for a Christian.

Using the claim of "freedom of religion" to be allowed to openly choose hurt is questionable. What's the intent here?

 

[alan1]

"But a gay person who walks into a bakery or a seamstress shop or a photography shop and wants a product to go with any kind of celebration that he/she plans to celebrate, that person poses absolutely no physical threat to you whatsover and his/her money spends just as well as everyone else's money."

Once a dervish young woman walked into my shop and demanded that I design and sew some satanic symbols to wear on her jacket. I refused to do it and would do so again.

Threatening to close down a community hospital because it will not perform abortions is abhorrent. And using politics to promote anti-Christian practices is a bad idea in some states who feel entitled under the First Amendment to have the right to refuse service to anybody.

You cannot sanitize the gay practice in the eyes of some who may have been forced to have gay sex at an early age by one who was also a pedophile who preyed on young, inexperienced children in particular.

It's an in-your-face sham to force people to work against their consciences. It just is.

The part above in blue.
I'm an atheist, and I think you should do that every time Ms Becki since those are your principles. No government should force you to do otherwise or allow you to be sued for your principles..

If your state has laws that demand no discrimination based on race or sexual orientation, it would be against the law to refuse someone service based on their race or sexual orientation. I doubt that any state has laws that force you to do business with someone based on something other than race and sexual orientation....so refusing to sew a satanic symbols would not be against the law.

Now the baker who refused to bake a cake for the gay couple, could have said he couldn't have it done in time, or used some other excuse, but that particular state has a law against discrimination based on race and sexual orientation, and the baker was defying it by admitting that he was not doing it because of their sexual orientation. When you break the law, you face the consequences. And if you have a business to serve the public, who all pay taxes, then you should honor your duty as a businessman and serve the public, not just those you think are okay in your opinion. The baker was trying to make a statement, and he lost, because more people are in favor of the law against discrimination based on sexual orientation. Selling them a cake is not going to taint you or make you want to become gay, but some people take their beliefs a bit too far.

I discriminate everyday. On a personal basis, I don't discriminate based upon race or skin color, but I do discriminate based upon many other things, sexual orientation being one of them. In fact, I suspect that the vast majority of people discriminate based upon sexual orientation.

Please hear me out on this sexual orientation discrimination point.

I am a heterosexual male, so there is no way that I would ever consider dating, having sex with, or marrying another male. Essentially, I have now discriminated against every male on the planet when it comes to dating, sex and marrying. I see nothing wrong with that. Additionally, I am opposed to dating, having sex with or marrying a hard drug addict (think drugs such as heroin, cocaine, crack) Yep, I discriminate against drug addicts.

Those are two examples, but let me return to the first example concerning the dating, sex or marrying a homosexual. The law may say that I am not allowed to discriminate based upon sexual orientation, but I'll bet there is not one single person on this board that would say I should be forced by that law to go on a date with homosexual male if I choose to exercise my discrimination concerning not dating a homosexual man.

I personally don't care if two people of the same gender want to associate with each other in any manner they choose as long as it doesn't violate my rights. In my opinion, a business owner has the right to refuse service to anybody they want to based upon their principles. At times, it may not be a wise business decision, but it is theirs to make. If a company doesn't want to do business with somebody based upon their principles let them live or die by that decision, no need for government force.

 

[alan1]

One is taught not to enable or support sin. Providing services to a gay wedding is supporting and enabling sin. Marriage means that the State recognizes the two as sexual partners and while being gay is not in and of itself a sin, practicing gay life style and having sex IS.

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to a hetero couple where one of the two partners was already unfaithful before the marriage, then they are also supporting that sin as well, right?

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to a smoker or a drinker, they are supporting that sin as well, right?

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to a Jew or a Buddhist or a Hindu for a wedding, they are supporting sin, right?

And every time a Christian sells a wedding cake to an obese person, they are supporting a sin, right? For obesity is one of the seven deadly sins in the bible..

You see, using your logic, there is practically no one to whom a Christian should be selling wedding cakes.

That line of logic is just batshit crazy.

They pick and choose which sins and/or "abominations" to target. Why is homosexuality more "sinful" than gluttony or greed? Christ's message was always interlaced with compassion over condemnation. That's what made him so revolutionary. The idea that you "hate the sin, but not the sinner". When you have a business that serves the public...how do you pick and choose in a manner that promotes compassion rather than deliberate hurt? I think that would be a key question for a Christian.

Using the claim of "freedom of religion" to be allowed to openly choose hurt is questionable. What's the intent here?

Using the government to force people to act against their principles can be construed as harm also. During the military draft (conscription) of the Vietnam war we allowed conscientious objectors to avoid combat roles. Religious based, or otherwise.