Featured I Own A Business...

As with a previous post, these examples are not the same. Creating something for their wedding ceremony is different than all these examples.

 

does delivering them paper constitute celebrating their abomination they want to try and call marriage? does giving them a ride and repair a vehicle constitute participation in their sin?

the answer is no.
These examples you give are extremely misleading...

There is a huge difference in the nature on making a celebratory cake and repairing a car.

 

So it’s all about your art and money??? There are no principles to consider? Ever? And you should have no right to refuse your service based on your beliefs and morals?

I don't think you can reasonably stand by your statement: no matter what they do with it after the fact

If you were the owner of a paint and someone was buying spray paint to huff it– you’re there to sell paint – period - cha-ching…

I mean, who are you to define what constitutes the definition of marriage anyhow???

As the owner of a cake shop when someone into bestiality comes in to order a wedding cake and asks for a donkey or sheep on top – you create it for them - cha-ching…

A polygamist wants two brides on top – cha-ching…

Someone wants a big groom and a little groom on top of the cake – cha-ching…

Nah, when it comes down to it it’s all about boundary lines and the government establishing moral guidelines onto the public while dictating who they must give service to. We need to be very careful when allowing the government to take away protection of rights to refuse service in our private businesses. I say we should have the freedom to be a draw our own line and refuse to give service according to moral principles – let them go elsewhere – it’s a free country or it is not - do not give them right to force our service where we do not wish to give it.

 

Why did you start this thread? Seeking personal reinforcement?

 

Do you think that the one that baked a cake for a gay marriage would be in error if he/she did not know what it was for? Should the baker ask for clarification of the customer's orientation before baking any cakes?

Again, I would say it is for the individual to decide where they draw the line in rendering a service which might be considered supporting gays. The refusal to deny services should be, in this country, up to the owner, at least in terms of common sense.

If objections are made because that person feels it violates "religious" principles, we should be free to maintain our position without interference from the government. When the government steps in and says we have to...the line is crossed.

The individual decision of the business owner, if related to religious objection, is something to be worked out in a religious setting, not governmental.

What we can say is that there is an opportunity for the owner to witness in a number of ways to those he is approached by. Refusing to write the names might be one line that can be drawn, and the customer could have it done elsewhere or find another bakery. This can present the owner's position without an outright refusal that would hinder governmental interference.

In this situation, I suggest that there can be an attempt on both parts to glorify themselves, rather than God.

As far as the Pope's statement, the saying is a picture is worth a thousand words, which implies a picture already in existence and does not lend itself to conflicting concepts.

In the Lord's day open homosexuality in Israel was not something that is seen as common from Scripture, and it is doubtful one would approach Him with such a request. Herod did not even approach Him though he was desirous to speak with Him. We do see John protest adultery, which ended in his death. But again John was not approached for an endorsement, and when homosexuals use this particular scenario to further their agenda then that would be a cause for refusal, in my opinion.

My business does not allow for me to know who many of the customers I provide services for are before already called in. I think it would be trifling to show up and refuse service due to their orientation. I do not see this as glorifying God, but accommodating my own feelings about gays, and possibly negating an intentional meeting between the Lord and these people.

God bless.

 

Some would say yes. That does not mean that they need to "grow up".

Again, if you did not want your ears scratched, why did you begin this thread?

 

This post says much about you.

You still have not said why you started this thread.

 

So what so many seem to be saying is if you bake wedding cakes, supply the place for weddings or receptions, have a limo service, are a photographer or a florist and refuse to cater to gays you are a person of strong conviction.

If you do anything else and cater to gays you are just doing a job and not supporting the lifestyle.

Got it. :thumbs:

 

It's funny how over the months that the "wedding cake" has become the metric of everyone's personal conviction. We really need to find another example. :laugh:

 

What you should get out of this thread is this: You guys think it is perfectly fine for a pastor to decide who they will do weddings for. After all, a pastor has the right to stick to their convictions. If a baker decides to stick to their convictions and not bake a cake for the same wedding, they are a bigot.

 

I'm appalled at the "all or nothing" mentality of this situation. See, this is the beauty of the capitalist system: don't like the service? Don't like the way they treated you? Then don't do business with them. Enough people don't like them, and don't do business with them, and guess what? They're not doing business anymore.

Instead, we have this mentality of "you WILL provide me what I want, period."

I like what church mouse guy wrote in another thread, and I apologize if it's already been said here: Ask a gay cakemaker to make a "celebrate heterosexuality" themed cake. Will we still see a willing making of the cake?

 

Completely agree with you. Government should not force private business to be in business with anyone they don't want to be.