Indiana GOP Leaders Shocked Their 'Religious Freedom' Law Is Seen As Anti-Gay

[Alcott]

Does the Jewish caterer reject all bashes for folks who hate him?

What difference does that make? He's "serving the public." Black Panthers and Nation of Islam are taught to hate white people, so can a white businessman refuse to serve one who, through clothing, medallions or other, identifies as one of them?

 

[Don]

But you've got to be consistent. You can't refuse the gay wedding but then turn around and do the cake for the barmitzvah.

....

But it's silly to say I won't bake a gay wedding cake if you're still baking cakes for adulterers and every other type sinner.

If your policy is that you don't bake cakes for people practicing sin, then say so and treat all of those folks the same.

First, what's sinful about a barmitzvah?

Second, how do I know someone is an adulterer? Adulterers aren't out advertising their sexual sin or trying to make it socially acceptable.

 

[Zaac]

What difference does that make? He's "serving the public."

If he's legally treating everyone who bashes him the same, it's not discrimination.

Black Panthers and Nation of Islam are taught to hate white people, so can a white businessman

They aren't taught that anymore than the GOP is taught to hate black people.

refuse to serve one who, through clothing, medallions or other, identifies as one of them?

Prove that Black Panthers and Nation of Islam people hate you and that you treat them the exact same way as you do other white, yellow or brown businessmen whom you know to hate you, and you should be fine.:thumbs:

 

[Zaac]

First, what's sinful about a barmitzvah?

It's celebrating a Jewish kid becoming an "adult" and responsible for all the laws and traditions of being a Jew. So you'd be baking a cake for someone celebrating his arrival into a religion that rejects Jesus.

Second, how do I know someone is an adulterer? Adulterers aren't out advertising their sexual sin or trying to make it socially acceptable.

How do you know someone is gay?

Not knowing means that somebody probably doesn't take issue as long as they don't know.

So to be consistent, they should start asking all of their customers if they are committing any unrepentant sin because they need to know before they can decide whether or not it goes against their "religious beliefs" before they can bake them a cake.

 

[Alcott]

They aren't taught that anymore than the GOP is taught to hate black people.

If you think that's true, then charge the party with that and see if there's enough evidence to convict.

Prove that Black Panthers and Nation of Islam people hate you and that you treat them the exact same way as you do other white, yellow or brown businessmen whom you know to hate you, and you should be fine.

If I have to prove that, does the Jewish deli owner have to prove that every Nazi hates him personally?

 

[Don]

How do you know someone is gay?

When they come in and ask for a wedding cake for Dave and Dave; or when they ask for catering for a gay wedding.

Not knowing means that somebody probably doesn't take issue as long as they don't know.

So to be consistent, they should start asking all of their customers if they are committing any unrepentant sin because they need to know before they can decide whether or not it goes against their "religious beliefs" before they can bake them a cake.

No; it means that as long as the sinner isn't advertising their sin and trying to make it acceptable, the vendor won't know, and there won't be a problem. It's because folks are defending the sin of homosexuality that we're even having this discussion.

 

[Crabtownboy]

When they come in and ask for a wedding cake for Dave and Dave; or when they ask for catering for a gay wedding.

And you might be wrong. I know a couple who are called Bill and Bob. Bill is male and Bob is female. Guess you would not serve them because of their names.

 

[targus]

Is this issue very different from conscience clauses provided by many States which allow physicians and pharmacists to refuse to provide services which violate their religious beliefs?

Would those denying the right of someone to not be forced into contributing to facilitation of a gay wedding also deny a doctor the right to refuse to perform an abortion based on his religious beliefs?

 

[Revmitchell]

And you might be wrong. I know a couple who are called Bill and Bob. Bill is male and Bob is female. Guess you would not serve them because of their names.

Everyone else see the silliness and irrelevance in this statement?

 

[Don]

And you might be wrong. I know a couple who are called Bill and Bob. Bill is male and Bob is female. Guess you would not serve them because of their names.

Silly rabbit. At that point I would ask, "your wife's name is Bob? Yes? That's interesting. Haven't seen that before. Now, what type of frosting did you say you wanted?"

 

[Zaac]

If you think that's true, then charge the party with that and see if there's enough evidence to convict.

Gosh, I wouldn't dare charge a group with such behavior anymore than I would tell black people that they are X times more likely to kill someone than everyone else. There certainly is enough evidence to say that a lot of folks in the GOP, just in looking at folks on this board, do harbor animus against Blacks.

If I have to prove that, does the Jewish deli owner have to prove that every Nazi hates him personally?

Sure if he wants to be consistent. But chances are, when someone has openly declared themselves to be a member of a group who prided itself in hating others, there's probably not too much more proof needed. But i would still give the person the benefit of the doubt because I don't know how and why they came to be members of such an organization.

 

[Zaac]

When they come in and ask for a wedding cake for Dave and Dave; or when they ask for catering for a gay wedding.

So would it be okay for Dave and Dave to come in and get a birthday cake for their adopted child who just came out as gay?

No; it means that as long as the sinner isn't advertising their sin and trying to make it acceptable, the vendor won't know, and there won't be a problem. It's because folks are defending the sin of homosexuality that we're even having this discussion.

That's not conviction. That's convenience. Conviction states it up front.

Where has anyone defended the sin of homosexuality? How is asking someone to bake a cake for you defending the sin of homosexuality.

This sounds so much like how Whites treated Blacks before the Civil Rights Act that it's eerie.

 

[Don]

So would it be okay for Dave and Dave to come in and get a birthday cake for their adopted child who just came out as gay?

A birthday cake is celebrating a birthday.

That's not conviction. That's convenience. Conviction states it up front.

Where has anyone defended the sin of homosexuality? How is asking someone to bake a cake for you defending the sin of homosexuality.

This sounds so much like how Whites treated Blacks before the Civil Rights Act that it's eerie.

You've missed the point again. Your constant reference to civil rights, to "if they want to be in business, they should just make the cake"--YOU have yet to address that many religions (not just Christianity) declare engaging in homosexuality to be sin. YOU have yet to address that scripture says we are not to endorse or support sin. YOU have yet to address that the Constitution was written so that the government guarantees freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

The one thing you and I agree on is that homosexuals are free to visit other businesses, and let the business that decides to live by Christian values die on its own from lack of business. But again, YOU have yet to address that they'd rather force those businesses to compromise their values, and force them out of business.

Frankly, Zaac, you're so full of love that I wonder if you realize that scripture says some people are going to burn in eternity. And worse, I wonder if you're so afraid of offending them you aren't warning them.

 

[Salty]

Is this issue very different from conscience clauses provided by many States which allow physicians and pharmacists to refuse to provide services which violate their religious beliefs?

Would those denying the right of someone to not be forced into contributing to facilitation of a gay wedding also deny a doctor the right to refuse to perform an abortion based on his religious beliefs?

But would that pharmacists be legally able to refuse to sell birth control to a un-married woman?

 

[Zaac]

A birthday cake is celebrating a birthday.

The objection, according to some, is the fact that you now know what they do in the bedroom and don't want to be seen as giving approval for that.

They are still gay and still having gay sex when they purchase the birthday cake. Can they order the birthday cake from you after you've told them you won't do a wedding cake?

You've missed the point again. Your constant reference to civil rights, to "if they want to be in business, they should just make the cake"--YOU have yet to address that many religions (not just Christianity) declare engaging in homosexuality to be sin.

And you're completely missing the point that they are purchasing a cake. They aren't trying to purchase your countertops upon which to have homosexual sex.

YOU have yet to address that scripture says we are not to endorse or support sin.

What sin? They are purchasing a cake. What sin are you endorsing or supporting by them purchasing a cake?

YOU have yet to address that the Constitution was written so that the government guarantees freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

Who has asked for freedom from religion?

The one thing you and I agree on is that homosexuals are free to visit other businesses, and let the business that decides to live by Christian values die on its own from lack of business. But again, YOU have yet to address that they'd rather force those businesses to compromise their values, and force them out of business.

Since when is discriminating and being nasty a Christian value? I think the issues are arising here because too many people are confusing their Christian and religious "beliefs" to be the same as God's when they clearly are not.

Frankly, Zaac, you're so full of love that I wonder if you realize that scripture says some people are going to burn in eternity. And worse, I wonder if you're so afraid of offending them you aren't warning them.

Now Don, you know if nothing else I'm always gonna tell you what the word of God says. I can be as full of love till I'm about to explode. But in that same love, I'm still gonna tell you the truth and not mince words about what God says.

Them purchasing a cake or not isn't going to keep them from burning in hell for all eternity.

Them not being offended isn't going to keep them from burning in hell for all eternity.

The Body of Christ has to figure out that you CANNOT point people to Jesus by alienating them and making them feel like you hate them and everything about them.

The Body of Christ has got to figure out that while we're alienating people because of our beliefs, those beliefs are NEVER a reason to discriminate and treat people in a manner that we wouldn't want to be treated.

Is it more important to honor your religious beliefs about something of which God's word hasn't spoken and thereby alienate folks to the point that they will receive nothing of the truth of Christ because of how they have been treated by His supposed representatives, or is it more important to position a relationship with people whereby they can see the love of Christ overflowing out of us?

I have heard so much from so called Christians over the last 30 something years that tells me that a lot of folks would much rather win an argument than they would a soul to the glory of Christ.

I keep saying, and I have for years, that we have created modern day lepers out of these people.

The love of Christ should compel us to treat them the way that we want to be treated.

The love of Christ should compel us to treat them as though we love them. And there is nothing of the love of Christ in discriminating against someone just because they sin.

 

[targus]

But would that pharmacists be legally able to refuse to sell birth control to a un-married woman?

It is my recollection that some States do have laws allowing pharmacists to not sell birth control pills based on religious conviction.

My point being that religious convictions are individual to each person and others can not say what is and is not a religious liberty reason for doing or not a particular action.

And that is exactly what these religious freedom laws are about.

People are free to act in accordance with their religious convictions and then if charged with discrimination can raise a defense of religious freedom in court.

It is then up to the court to decide if that defense holds or not.

 

[Salty]

...My point being that religious convictions are individual to each person and others can not say what is and is not a religious liberty reason for doing or not a particular action. ...

Fully agree.

Interesting - that some demand that we accept them - but they are not willing to accept us.

Here is the bottom line. A baker could very easily advertise that he welcomes to bake for the homos*xual community.

Hmmm - New Thread

 

[Alcott]

Gosh, I wouldn't dare charge a group with such behavior anymore than I would tell black people that they are X times more likely to kill someone than everyone else. There certainly is enough evidence to say that a lot of folks in the GOP, just in looking at folks on this board, do harbor animus against Blacks.

Yes or No: Do blacks commit more homicides per capita than whites?
Yes or No: Do GOP whites hate demo blacks more than demo blacks hate GOP whites?

Sure if he wants to be consistent. But chances are, when someone has openly declared themselves to be a member of a group who prided itself in hating others, there's probably not too much more proof needed. But i would still give the person the benefit of the doubt because I don't know how and why they came to be members of such an organization.

But is hating someone-- or being hated by someone-- a legal reason to refuse to do business with such a person? If so, that could render civil rights laws null. All a business operator has to say is he or she thinks that person hates him or her. So-- does a Jewish baker have to bake a cake ordered by a nazi group or not? What is they request a swastika on the top of it? If a Christian baker thinks a qr who orders a cake hates him or her, is that the same, similar, or a legitimate means of forcing the person to act against his or her beliefs and will?

 

[Zaac]

Yes or No: Do blacks commit more homicides per capita than whites?

That's got nothing to do with the likelihood of Blacks to commit homicide.

Yes or No: Do GOP whites hate demo blacks more than demo blacks hate GOP whites?

Got me. I didn't know anyone had done such a study :laugh:

But is hating someone-- or being hated by someone-- a legal reason to refuse to do business with such a person? If so, that could render civil rights laws null.

As a Christian, I say a definite no. I am never amazed at how far loving your enemies goes.

All a business operator has to say is he or she thinks that person hates him or her. So-- does a Jewish baker have to bake a cake ordered by a nazi group or not?

He doesn't HAVE to do anything.

What is they request a swastika on the top of it?

Tell him you don't bake cakes for anyone with swastikas on top so please choose something else.

If a Christian baker thinks a qr who orders a cake hates him or her, is that the same, similar, or a legitimate means of forcing the person to act against his or her beliefs and will?

I think a Christian should be more inclined to serve someone who says they hate them.

 

[Salty]

Tell him you don't bake cakes for anyone with swastikas on top so please choose something else.

Well, that's discrimination.