Ariz. gov. vetoes religious rights bill

[Yeshua1]

Dont know about happy people - but the law would have allowed a business not to coeereced to break thier religious faith, regardless of the situation.

The law never once mentioned h0mosexuals.

What would Christians do if the govt passed a law to save energy by forbidding all but emergancy driving on Sunday.
Germany did that exact thing back in the 70's. Hmmmmmm

Should have been signed!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I wonder how a clearly homosexual printing business would feel about Westboro going in to get signs printed. Now they must - by law - print those signs.

That isn't true. Anyone can refuse service to anyone, it's been part of the law since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ever see one of these signs?

That's all you have to do. The bakery, the photographer, and anyone else who has been sued by gays because they were refused services made the mistake of telling them it was because there were gay. That's begging for a lawsuit. And they got one.

I stand by my previous comments. We don't want to be accused, as Christians, of codifying discrimination, and that's what this bill and the one Kansas voted down last week would have done. We already have the right to refuse service. We just don't want to say why. Give them a couple names and move on. We aren't going to convince them of the wrongness of their lifestyle, and by saying, "I'm a Christian and your lifestyle goes against my religious beliefs," you get what you ask for.

This debate is getting ridiculous. Supporting Jim Crow laws against gays?? And what does that make us? Certainly not "good witnesses for Christ," not even close.

 

[Zaac]

God wants us to love them, to get them the Gospel of jesus, but NOT to condone and accept their sinful lifestyles as now acceptable behaviour!

You're baking them a cake as part of your business. Once it's out of your hands, it's theirs to do with as they please. What does refusing to sell them goods that are for sale have to do with love?

I'm sure that he sells cakes to liars who keep lying. Does that mean he is condoning their sinful lifestyles? I'm sure he sales cakes to fornicators who celebrate the birthdays of their fellow fornicators. Does that mean he is condoning their sinful lifestyle?

You're selling a PRODUCT. You're not endorsing a person and what they do.

Satan has gotten the church in many quarters now saying you can be actively gay and saved to!

You can be actively gay and saved. Just like you can be an active liar, adulterer, covetor, thief, etc. and still be saved. Hopefully the Holy Spirit and mature Christians are directing such people away from those sins. But folks commit all sorts of sin and are still saved.

There is but one sin that cannot be forgiven. And nowhere in Scripture does it say that to be the homosexual offense.

 

[Zaac]

That isn't true. Anyone can refuse service to anyone, it's been part of the law since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ever see one of these signs?

That's all you have to do. The bakery, the photographer, and anyone else who has been sued by gays because they were refused services made the mistake of telling them it was because there were gay. That's begging for a lawsuit. And they got one.

I stand by my previous comments. We don't want to be accused, as Christians, of codifying discrimination, and that's what this bill and the one Kansas voted down last week would have done. We already have the right to refuse service. We just don't want to say why. Give them a couple names and move on. We aren't going to convince them of the wrongness of their lifestyle, and by saying, "I'm a Christian and your lifestyle goes against my religious beliefs," you get what you ask for.

This debate is getting ridiculous. Supporting Jim Crow laws against gays?? And what does that make us? Certainly not "good witnesses for Christ," not even close.

And the Church should be saying AMEN!

 

[Zaac]

Zaac, you can bake the cakes for Planned Parenthood--they like a coat hanger for decoration on them--and Michael Jackson for his sick birthday parties--he likes them with money going to the parents.

You know the people at PP need Jesus too. People thought Jesus was condoning sin when HE ate with the tax collectors. I'm about sharing the love of Jesus with people who need Him. If that means selling them a cake, so that it opens up a relationship whereby I get to tell them about Jesus and why ALL life is precious, then yep, I'll bake them a cake.

Next, Zaac, you will be telling us that the SBC should marry gays so that they can have a church wedding.

Why would the SBC or any CHurch go against God's definition of what marriage is?

There is a stark difference between saying that something is okay that God says is a sin and selling a product.

And I bet you slander Pope Pius XII as Hitler's Pope, right?

I didn't know Pope Pius XII so I can only tell you what historical records say of him.

 

[Zaac]

For the rest of you, God has commanded us to speak up for the oppressed, and to rebuke the works of darkness. Zaac cares only to justify Sodom and indict God's elect.

You're funny. All you do is speak against the oppressed. Try a little love instead of getting stuck on convincing them that they are wrong about your pet sin.:thumbsup:

If you're the elect, then start acting like the One Who elected you.

 

[Zaac]

Do you really see the govt forcing christians to partake of illecit activities against our religious core beliefs as being 'no big deal?"

What illicit activities? What law would you be breaking by selling someone a cake? Are you stuffing it with pot or cocaine?

 

[Yeshua1]

That isn't true. Anyone can refuse service to anyone, it's been part of the law since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ever see one of these signs?

That's all you have to do. The bakery, the photographer, and anyone else who has been sued by gays because they were refused services made the mistake of telling them it was because there were gay. That's begging for a lawsuit. And they got one.

I stand by my previous comments. We don't want to be accused, as Christians, of codifying discrimination, and that's what this bill and the one Kansas voted down last week would have done. We already have the right to refuse service. We just don't want to say why. Give them a couple names and move on. We aren't going to convince them of the wrongness of their lifestyle, and by saying, "I'm a Christian and your lifestyle goes against my religious beliefs," you get what you ask for.

This debate is getting ridiculous. Supporting Jim Crow laws against gays?? And what does that make us? Certainly not "good witnesses for Christ," not even close.

again, NOT refusing to service gay people, just desiring to exercise freedom of religion to NOT be forced to say cater gay wedding, will sellt hem the cakes in business setting, but NOT taking them to the "church" for a gay wedding!

Do you see the Govt calmoring to have Muslims serve Jews, or KKK set up shop in NAACP town meeting to sell coffee and cake?

 

[InTheLight]

I read it. And it just seems unnecessary. But that's been happening a lot. To make a statement, it seems that some states are attempting to pass legislature that is already federally unnecessary.

Not only unnecessary, but it could backfire on Christians. Imagine signs in businesses, "We don't serve born-again Christians" or "We don't serve creationists".

Before anyone says that is far-fetched, just consider the allegations that if gay marriage is legalized the next thing will be a man wanting to marry his goat.

 

[church mouse guy]

It is about trying to steal someone's business if they refuse to make a special product for you. I am going to go downtown to Shapiro's Deli and ask them to bake me a cake with swastikas on it to show a little love for the Nazi party that they voted for in the White House.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

again, NOT refusing to service gay people, just desiring to exercise freedom of religion to NOT be forced to say cater gay wedding, will sellt hem the cakes in business setting, but NOT taking them to the "church" for a gay wedding!

That's a joke, Yeshua. The bills in Arizona and Kansas may not have mentioned gays, but that's exactly who the bills were aimed at. And church bylaws state (and if they don't, they should) that churches are for use by members only.

This is about discrimination, nothing less. If you can live with that, fine, but I don't want my faith to be the reasoning behind a Jim Crow law for gays. Especially when the law isn't necessary, given there is already a way to legally refuse service to them

 

[Yeshua1]

You're baking them a cake as part of your business. Once it's out of your hands, it's theirs to do with as they please. What does refusing to sell them goods that are for sale have to do with love?

I'm sure that he sells cakes to liars who keep lying. Does that mean he is condoning their sinful lifestyles? I'm sure he sales cakes to fornicators who celebrate the birthdays of their fellow fornicators. Does that mean he is condoning their sinful lifestyle?

You're selling a PRODUCT. You're not endorsing a person and what they do.



You can be actively gay and saved. Just like you can be an active liar, adulterer, covetor, thief, etc. and still be saved. Hopefully the Holy Spirit and mature Christians are directing such people away from those sins. But folks commit all sorts of sin and are still saved.

There is but one sin that cannot be forgiven. And nowhere in Scripture does it say that to be the homosexual offense.

Again, NOT saying that we refuse a gay couple dinner at my diner, but will refuse to be forced to cater their "gay wedding!"

How can I partake of what is an abomination before God?

And how can one willfully walk, continue to habitually practice and condone being gay, a muderer, raptist etc , and still claim that they love and obey God?

 

[InTheLight]

It is about trying to steal someone's business if they refuse to make a special product for you. I am going to go downtown to Shapiro's Deli and ask them to bake me a cake with swastikas on it to show a little love for the Nazi party that they voted for in the White House.

Go ahead and try it. If the owner refuses, what's your response? All the owner has to say is, "I don't want to do it" and not give a reason. These Christians could have done similarly with their catering or photography business and there would be no brou-haha.

 

[Yeshua1]

That's a joke, Yeshua. The bills in Arizona and Kansas may not have mentioned gays, but that's exactly who the bills were aimed at. And church bylaws state (and if they don't, they should) that churches are for use by members only.

This is about discrimination, nothing less. If you can live with that, fine, but I don't want my faith to be the reasoning behind a Jim Crow law for gays. Especially when the law isn't necessary, given there is already a way to legally refuse service to them

Again, we are NOT refusing gay people service to have dinner, sleep in motel etc, but are saying can refuse to cater their gay weddings, print out fliers for gay attraction meeting etc!

doesn't God Himself already discriminate against that lifestyle choice, was he wrong indoing that?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Again, NOT saying that we refuse a gay couple dinner at my diner, but will refuse to be forced to cater their "gay wedding!"

How can I partake of what is an abomination before God?

And how can one willfully walk, continue to habitually practice and condone being gay, a muderer, raptist etc , and still claim that they love and obey God?

What part of "I can't do it," do you not understand? That's all that needs be said, and we already have the right to say that. Give them a couple names of other bakers, photographers, or whatever, and move on.

 

[InTheLight]

How do you people that support this law expect to screen every customer that comes into your business? Are you going to ask them point blank, "Are you gay"?

 

[Yeshua1]

Go ahead and try it. If the owner refuses, what's your response? All the owner has to say is, "I don't want to do it" and not give a reason. These Christians could have done similarly with their catering or photography business and there would be no brou-haha.

Muslims object to doing things for reliogious reason, also Jews, why not us also then?

Freedom of religion allows us to decide wether to do business or not, correct?

 

[InTheLight]

What part of "I can't do it," do you not understand? That's all that needs be said, and we already have the right to say that. Give them a couple names of other bakers, photographers, or whatever, and move on.

Yes, it's not complicated...

 

[Zaac]

Not only unnecessary, but it could backfire on Christians. Imagine signs in businesses, "We don't serve born-again Christians" or "We don't serve creationists".

Before anyone says that is far-fetched, just consider the allegations that if gay marriage is legalized the next thing will be a man wanting to marry his goat.

You are absolutely correct. This just flies in the face of understanding that we are still in the world. If businesses decided that they no longer wanted to do business with churches or evangelicals because of our stances, would we view the bill the same way?

If your favorite restaurant put up a sign saying "we no longer serve evangelical Christians because of how they treat some of our other customers" what would we think?

 

[Yeshua1]

You're funny. All you do is speak against the oppressed. Try a little love instead of getting stuck on convincing them that they are wrong about your pet sin.:thumbsup:

If you're the elect, then start acting like the One Who elected you.

So you do justify homosexuality then still?