The Loudest Voice

[300miles]

... Why can't the gay couple just go somewhere else for their x-rated cake?

... Now, I don't mean that the Christian cake baker should have to decorate a cake with gay porn

From the article you linked (which is about N.Ireland btw, not USA) the "offensive" cake was simply a political message with a picture of Bert and Ernie. I don't see how anyone could mistake that for pornography.

Otherwise, you are right that someone in the business of selling product to the public cannot discriminate, regardless of their personal religion.

Religious "freedom" does not trump the law.


The "offensive cake":

[HipKat]

There are lots of incidences in the Bible of Jews buying things from questionable people. When they were coming out of the wilderness they bought food and drink from the Moabites for instance, who were pagan worshippers and child sacrificers. The Bible says we are IN the world but not OF the world. If a Christian makes his living selling goods in the world, why should he care who buys them? It shouldn't affect him. The customer that doesn't follow his moral code isn't going to affect his faith or his life. That's silly. Now, I don't mean that the Christian cake baker should have to decorate a cake with gay porn, but, selling something to a gay couple should not be a big deal - it's just a business deal.

And how silly does it sound to say "I've got a right to not sell to gays" in one breath, and say with your next, "I'll love and pray for them - just not sell to them."

The Bible does not say do not sell to gays - no Christian "rights" are being violated. People like that give Christians a bad name. The Bible doesn't say: "Love your neighbor, unless he's gay and needs a cake."

You can't have it both ways. As a business owner, I have a right to not sell to or serve anyone I wish. There is no law that says I have to sell to/serve everyone that approaches my business. The item and price are what is called, in law, as "an invitation to treat" not a promise to sell. The "rights" I'm speaking of, as you mentioned laws earlier in the thread, are covered by the constitution and the right to religious freedom as long as it abides by the laws of the land.

13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.Romans 13:1-5

The Bible also says:

30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’[a] 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”Mark 12:30-31

So yes, I do have a duty to love and pray for them.

43“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbori and hate your enemy.’ 44But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.Matthew 5:43-47

[300miles]

As a business owner, I have a right to not sell to or serve anyone I wish. There is no law that says I have to sell to/serve everyone that approaches my business.

That's not entirely true. A business owner is not allowed to discriminate. Some of those factors are spelled out specifically in law. You can't deny service to someone simply because they're black (race), Chinese (ethnic origin), or Muslim (religion). That is blatant discrimination and you would lose fast in a court of law. If you baked wedding cakes for everyone, but denied service to a mixed-race couple because it offended your religious beliefs, you would be guilty of discrimination. Sexual Orientation doesn't have as many protections, so people consider it a gray area. But that is changing quickly.

[HipKat]

That's not entirely true. A business owner is not allowed to discriminate. Some of those factors are spelled out specifically in law. You can't deny service to someone simply because they're black (race), Chinese (ethnic origin), or Muslim (religion). That is blatant discrimination and you would lose fast in a court of law. If you baked wedding cakes for everyone, but denied service to a mixed-race couple because it offended your religious beliefs, you would be guilty of discrimination. Sexual Orientation doesn't have as many protections, so people consider it a gray area. But that is changing quickly.

And that's the thing. It IS a gray area but there are always loopholes. Anyone who admittedly doesn't serve someone only because of race, etc. is obviously putting themselves in jeopardy

[300miles]

These people are kind of dumb. Instead of "enjoying" their ability to discriminate using these gray areas and loopholes, they attempt to solidify the discrimination by specifically allowing it under LAW. The obvious backlash with have the exact opposite effect: The new law allowing discrimination will probably be repealed due to the backlash, and in it's place will be laws that make that discrimination clearly illegal... eliminating any remaining gray area. All the states need to do is add sexual orientation to their anti-discrimination lists and the argument is over. Probably almost half the states already do protect against it. NYS does. If history is any lesson, that will eventually include the rest of the country too.

[WNYresident]

What about client you simply don't want to deal with.

Nothing to do with sex, race or what ever.

Just clients who are pain in the butt to deal with?

[300miles]

if a specific client is making it difficult for you to do your job, that would have nothing to do with religious rights or discrimination, because someone else asking for the exact same thing would not be a problem.

[HipKat]

These people are kind of dumb. Instead of "enjoying" their ability to discriminate using these gray areas and loopholes, they attempt to solidify the discrimination by specifically allowing it under LAW. The obvious backlash with have the exact opposite effect: The new law allowing discrimination will probably be repealed due to the backlash, and in it's place will be laws that make that discrimination clearly illegal... eliminating any remaining gray area. All the states need to do is add sexual orientation to their anti-discrimination lists and the argument is over. Probably almost half the states already do protect against it. NYS does. If history is any lesson, that will eventually include the rest of the country too.

You'd have to be able to prove that I was refusing service due to sexual orientation, but to get back on track with the Biblical view, I would probably just serve them.

[Save Us]

What about client you simply don't want to deal with.

Nothing to do with sex, race or what ever.

Just clients who are pain in the butt to deal with?

Some of these 'discriminated' people are smarter than that they KNOW when are being discriminated,, hell they'll cry discrimination even if it's not warranted.

[nogods]

Yes, Christian business owners should try to deceive others as to why they are not willing to serve homosexuals to avoid being charged with violating human rights. That's very Christ like.

[WNYresident]

Nogods.. You tend to troll religious threads.

nogods

Yes, Christian business owners should try to deceive others as to why they are not willing to serve homosexuals to avoid being charged with violating human rights. That's very Christ like.

Why can one religious/non-religious group be offended about something and changes are made? While if another religious group is offended they are told they have to deal with it?

[nogods]

Nogods.. You tend to troll religious threads.




Why can one religious/non-religious group be offended about something and changes are made? While if another religious group is offended they are told they have to deal with it?

exactly what are you refering to?

If a public institution depicts your deity in a derogatory manner, that is a direct attack on your religious beliefs. If you are offended because of what someone else does in their bedroom, that is direct evidence that you are a pervert.

[WNYresident]

I'm referring to how you tend to troll threads that are discussions about the Bible, Jesus and such. Instead of discussing the actual topic you start up with the "your false god"... etc... I'm not saying I disagree or agree with you but it's what i see.

Your answer is not what I asked. Or at least think.

I asked.

Why can one religious/non-religious group be offended about something and changes are made? While if another religious group is offended they are told they have to deal with it?

Bedrooms were never brought up.

I mean why can one religious group or a group of atheist be offended over let's say some religious symbol. People will go out of their way to make sure that symbol or where ever is changed so those groups are no longer offended. BUT if another religious group ( in this case Christians ) say they are offended by something they are told we will make a law so you still have to deal with it.

[nogods]

I'm referring to how you tend to troll threads that are discussions about the Bible, Jesus and such. Instead of discussing the actual topic you start up with the "your false god"... etc... I'm not saying I disagree or agree with you but it's what i see.

Your answer is not what I asked. Or at least think.

I asked.

Why can one religious/non-religious group be offended about something and changes are made? While if another religious group is offended they are told they have to deal with it?

Bedrooms were never brought up.

I mean why can one religious group or a group of atheist be offended over let's say some religious symbol. People will go out of their way to make sure that symbol or where ever is changed so those groups are no longer offended. BUT if another religious group ( in this case Christians ) say they are offended by something they are told we will make a law so you still have to deal with it.

The christians are claiming to be offended by what other people do in their bedrooms. That is perverted. A gay couple eating in a restaurant or ordering a wedding a cake are no different than a heterosexual couple doing the same thing - there is nothing offensive about people eating diner or purchasing wedding items - unless the beholder is thinking about the couple having sex. That's the perversion.

Atheist are offended when a godiot tries to use public property or public facilities to spread their private beliefs. Atheist never complain about people praying in the closets as Mathew advised:

But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

Crying "troll" is the internet adolescents response to "I can't think of a logical response to his assertion, so I want to shut him up."

When someone post a topic that requires a false premise to be valid, responding post that expose the false premise are not "troll" responses - they are exposing the false premise. Those who don't like their false premises being exposed are the ones who yell troll the loudest.

[WNYresident]

The christians are claiming to be offended by what other people do in their bedrooms. That is perverted. A gay couple eating in a restaurant or ordering a wedding a cake are no different than a heterosexual couple doing the same thing - there is nothing offensive about people eating diner or purchasing wedding items - unless the beholder is thinking about the couple having sex. That's the perversion.

Atheist are offended when a godiot tries to use public property or public facilities to spread their private beliefs. Atheist never complain about people praying in the closets as Mathew advised:



Crying "troll" is the internet adolescents response to "I can't think of a logical response to his assertion, so I want to shut him up."

When someone post a topic that requires a false premise to be valid, responding post that expose the false premise are not "troll" responses - they are exposing the false premise. Those who don't like their false premises being exposed are the ones who yell troll the loudest.

There you go again.

You are making it about what they are doing in their bedrooms while a group of people believe marriage is between a man and a woman. Personally I don't care either way because we are not supposed to judge others.

That is one definition of a troll. Either way you tend to troll.