fonewear said: »
I don't think Jesus would care about gay wedding cakes but that is just a hunch...
Meanwhile, At The Huffington Post: |
||
|
Meanwhile, at the Huffington Post:
fonewear said: » I don't think Jesus would care about gay wedding cakes but that is just a hunch... Offline
Posts: 35422
Remember kids: If you're doing a Google search for gay pizza, put the filters on max.
Offline
Posts: 35422
I almost searched getting gay with kids the other day cause South Park...
Back in the early days of the internet there was site called rotten.com that had all sorts of messed up ***. Of course being like 14 at the time we checked it daily. Also this brings back memories: YouTube Video Placeholder Offline
Posts: 595
Leviathan.Protey said: » charlo999 said: » Leviathan.Protey said: » charlo999 said: » So providing food or eating with people is supporting their sin? You even quote Jesus as suggesting it's not. As we know Jesus was without sin. Providing food in itself is not. Providing food for the purpose of celebrating sin is. Think of it this way: you can provide cake as food to have dinner with people in jail. you can provide cake as food with a file in it that aids them in escape. see the difference? the first is merely providing sustenance that we all need to live. the other is supporting wrongful behavior. so back to providers of food: they should provide food that everyone needs to live, but they shouldn't be required to provide food that aids in wrongful behavior. This is the worst analogy ever. Are you suggesting they would provide food with strap Ons or a box of anal beads? You can provide food but still not agree with sin. And you can provide food but not put two men or two women figurines getting married on top. Fair point. Didn't see if that was a request. I assumed people did things like that themselves though. You could compromise and just say you would do the cake then not dress it with the figures? Then if it offends it's not your problem. Not like wedding food has all got symbolism on it. It's just 1 circumstance on 1 food item out of all of it. To just dismiss/turn your back on sinful people is not following Jesus. We are all in sin. What makes their sin any worse than yours? It makes me laugh when people seem to give themselves authority on what sin is worse than others. That's for God to decide not mans. And he has already decided, all sin equates to the same. Disconnection with God. Y'all seem to be purposefully missing the points that Protey and I are making. You must interact with sinners daily, as we are all sinners. Our point is that by providing a service to an event or w/e that is in direct violation of Scriptural teachings you are condoning the sinful behavior it represents. If your beliefs are that same sex relations are sinful, then your support or participation in an event celebrating the sin is also sinful. We can not keep others from sinning, but should not aid them in the commission of sinful behavior. Think of it as being an accessory to a crime. We are enjoined not to aid another's sin.
Romans 1:32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. Ezekiel 13:22 Because you have disheartened the righteous falsely, although I have not grieved him, and you have encouraged the wicked, that he should not turn from his evil way to save his life Ephesians 5 8-11 for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light 9 for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true, 10 and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. 11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. 1 Timothy 5:22 Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, nor take part in the sins of others; keep yourself pure. YouTube Video Placeholder This is nothing but a mob picking on a family for having the "wrong beliefs". I wonder if anyone really feels like they're sticking it to the man when they ***all over this small family. If ~ 60% of people support gay marriages as the wsj and other polling says, aren't you just the oppressive majority you spent years fighting against? Tweets coming out now that the business has received many many death threats, and might close out of fear for their lives. Pretty pathetic liberals... You sure showed the world how tolerant you were. Asura.Emoneaone said: » Y'all seem to be purposefully missing the points that Protey and I are making. You must interact with sinners daily, as we are all sinners. Our point is that by providing a service to an event or w/e that is in direct violation of Scriptural teachings you are condoning the sinful behavior it represents. If your beliefs are that same sex relations are sinful, then your support or participation in an event celebrating the sin is also sinful. We can not keep others from sinning, but should not aid them in the commission of sinful behavior. Think of it as being an accessory to a crime. We are enjoined not to aid another's sin. Romans 1:32 Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them. Ezekiel 13:22 Because you have disheartened the righteous falsely, although I have not grieved him, and you have encouraged the wicked, that he should not turn from his evil way to save his life Ephesians 5 8-11 for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light 9 for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true, 10 and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. 11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. 1 Timothy 5:22 Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, nor take part in the sins of others; keep yourself pure. nobody is buying your lies nausi.
We don't filter out laws through Christian beliefs, sorry. Having to serve your entire community does not place an undue burden on the practice of your religion. Laws that promote "religious freedom" (in quotes because that's not actually what's being promoted) have no legal backing and won't stand up to any legal scrutiny.
It's hilarious to see the last holdouts on LGBT rights wet their pants over the prospect that their once popular beliefs being left by the wayside. You lost, ***. Get over it. The LGBT community won't be packing it up and heading back into the closet. Well I heard big money has come out against this law, so it'll go away soon enough. I think we can stop caring about it now.
My question is, how can a person say he/she won't serve gays specifically because they're gay, and in the very next sentence say they don't have anything against gay people? Cerberus.Pleebo said: » We don't filter out laws through Christian beliefs, sorry. Having to serve your entire community does not place an undue burden on the practice of your religion. Laws that promote "religious freedom" (in quotes because that's not actually what's being promoted) have no legal backing and won't stand up to any legal scrutiny. It's hilarious to see the last holdouts on LGBT rights wet their pants over the prospect that their once popular beliefs being left by the wayside. You lost, ***. Get over it. The LGBT community won't be packing it up and heading back into the closet. Our Constitution is what is the "filter". No one is wetting pants, we just want what our Founders put in the 1st amendment, the right to practice our religious beliefs without interference from the state. There is hypocrisy, in that the homosexual micro-minority (2-3% of population) wants their behavior tolerated but our behavior based on our faith can not be tolerated. If our Constitution no longer matters, if Big Government is to run roughshod over our liberties, then it is time to stand up and throw off the yoke of tyranny. Thanks to the 2nd amendment, I'm well prepared to do so. The majority of the military is also inclined to respect the Constitution over the current government. I know this because I spent 20 years in the military. Is it time for Patrick Henry's oratory once again? "Give me liberty or give me death!"? You won't respond to reason. You don't respect our beliefs but insist we respect yours. Heck, I'm ready. I've the weapons and ammunition. I took an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution. I'll stand up and fight for it if need be. Politicians and jurists today seem to think their agenda is more important. Perhaps we should split the country between the uber-leftists and the conservatives. In 20 years, which do you think would be more prosperous? I'm confident that the "Red states" will outdo the "Blue states". Rant all you want. It just shows your hypocrisy. No you won't, because you're a bunch of pansies. Always have been, always will be. That's why you cling to your guns, because it makes you feel powerful, when it fact, you're just a scared child throwing a tantrum.
Bismarck.Ihina said: » Well I heard big money has come out against this law, so it'll go away soon enough. I think we can stop caring about it now. My question is, how can a person say he/she won't serve gays specifically because they're gay, and in the very next sentence say they don't have anything against gay people? Please reread. It isn't not refusing to serving folks because they are gay. I'd let anyone buy my pastries or what not. But I won't involve myself in an event (by supplying a "wedding cake") that directly contravenes my deeply held religious beliefs. One is general commerce. The other is a direct contribution/involvement in an activity I hold sinful. There is a difference, if you'd open your closed mind enough to see it. Asura.Emoneaone said: » Bismarck.Ihina said: » Well I heard big money has come out against this law, so it'll go away soon enough. I think we can stop caring about it now. My question is, how can a person say he/she won't serve gays specifically because they're gay, and in the very next sentence say they don't have anything against gay people? Please reread. It isn't not refusing to serving folks because they are gay. I'd let anyone buy my pastries or what not. But I won't involve myself in an event (by supplying a "wedding cake") that directly contravenes my deeply held religious beliefs. One is general commerce. The other is a direct contribution/involvement in an activity I hold sinful. There is a difference, if you'd open your closed mind enough to see it. Yeah, no. We all know what framing means. You're just framing it in a way that minimizes you looking like a ***. And it would have worked too if everyone in the world was 5 years old. Also, religion does no harm in the world, apparently.
I see the fascists are out in full force this morning...
Speaking of fascist, is Alt ever coming back?
Idk, he hasn't posted in forever.
Asura.Emoneaone said: » And your claim that your bigotry is not selective is horseshit. Do you refuse to serve divorcees? Do you refuse to cater to fat people? Do you turn away people who will be serving shellfish at their ceremony? Do you ask if either the bride or groom will be donning blended fabrics? Yeah, it's a joke how you have to hide behind religion instead of just being an out-and-out bigot. At least the latter is more honest. Well, given that us libs have conquered the world, taken over every site on the internet, taken over every branch of government besides a small majority in congress and is approaching perfecting our mass mind controlling machine, it's just a matter of time before we assimilate him too.
Tell AG10039221 I'm going on my lunch break. Praise Lord Obama. I figured he got perma-banned. /shrug
Cerberus.Pleebo said: » Yeah, it's a joke how you have to hide behind religion instead of just being an out-and-out bigot. At least the latter is more honest. All you're doing with name calling and statements like this is making them even more resilient and push back even more. MLK Jr. talked about avoiding the creation of an atmosphere of white guilt, well you're doing the same, only with 'alternative' life styles, for lack of a better word without such strong condemnation (from either side). Nobody ever eases into tolerance over generations of believing something, harassing them and calling them names really doesn't make you look any better. It's not a name. It's an apt term with a specific meaning. I'd have no problems with whatever group of people condemning the way I live my life but the line gets drawn at unfair treatment. They don't get leeway for that.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Nobody ever eases into tolerance over generations of believing something, harassing them and calling them names really doesn't make you look any better. Pretty much this. I've known a few Christians who have changed the way they view the gay community from a negative stance to an accepting stance, and in every case it was because they knew a gay person who was a really good example to them. Calling people bigots or any other name, whether fitting or not, isn't winning anybody to the cause. Keep up the tactics that only entrench people further, Pleebo. It seems to be working out just dandy for you. I live in a state where I can now marry whoever I want and not be fired for being myself. You're right. It is working out just dandy so I really don't care to win over a couple of random internet bigots.
Edit: There's also no intention to pass some *** "religious freedom" laws here so that's dandy too. Good idea Rav. Maybe we should go easier on the bigots, hold their hand, pat their heads, take them out for ice cream and do everything earthly possible to spare their feels, as KB would put it.
Maybe then, they'll stop being such garbage human beings. The right can call homosexuals immoral, mistakes of nature, a danger to children, a plague on society, all the while sit on their moral high horse. Whenever someone eventually takes a swing at the right, all the right can do is cry, and cry, and cry, and cry and cry and cry and cry. |
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|