What is it about the gays?..

[PsyOps]

Go and sin no more?

Well, if you completely blow the opportunity to convey that message... :shrug:

Can you imagine if Jesus had completely rejected the woman that committed adultery because he disagreed with her lifestyle, and had her sent away to be stoned? and what was said:

“Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

“No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

Do I believe the gay couple would have changed their ways if the owners had baked them a cake and seized that as an opportunity to preach? I doubt it. But just like the rich man, not everyone will accept the Word. But they certainly won't accept it if we outright reject people we disagree with.

 

[Hank]

blow the opportunity .

Ghey

 

[Beta]

You might have an argument IF the bakery totally refused service to them because they are homosexual. But that was not the case. The bakery simply stated they cannot contribute to the gay marriage celebration as God forbids it. They were more than willing to make them any other type of cake.

What did they ask for that was so terrible, a penis cake?

I can't find anything that explains what the cake request was so I can only guess. This was probably a cake that just happened to have 2 grooms on the top that would have otherwise been a cake found at some straight weddings. Big deal. Make the cake but tell them you don't have 2 grooms and they can probably find that elsewhere, or find someone who's "more comfortable" putting 2 grooms on the top.

Everything I'm reading says he refused to make the wedding cake because it was for a homosexual wedding. So he refused to serve two customers because they were gay. What's the difference if it's for cupcakes or a gay wedding?

 

[baydoll]

Well, if you completely blow the opportunity to convey that message... :shrug:

Can you imagine if Jesus had completely rejected the woman that committed adultery because he disagreed with her lifestyle, and had her sent away to be stoned? and what was said:

How do you know they blew that message? Can you read minds as well predict the future?

And are you forgetting what Jesus SAID to that woman after everybody left?

 

[vraiblonde]

And are you forgetting what Jesus SAID to that woman after everybody left?

You mean that "go and sin no more stuff"?

Psh.

Tigga please.

Anyway, business owners should be able to refuse service to anyone they please for any reason they please, and that is my final answer on this particular topic.

 

[Larry Gude]

Anyway, business owners should be able to refuse service to anyone they please for any reason they please, and that is my final answer on this particular topic.

No, they shouldn't.

 

[baydoll]

No, they shouldn't.

OH so one side can now force the other to comply?

That sounds like slavery/communism.

 

[baydoll]

What did they ask for that was so terrible, a penis cake?

I can't find anything that explains what the cake request was so I can only guess. This was probably a cake that just happened to have 2 grooms on the top that would have otherwise been a cake found at some straight weddings. Big deal. Make the cake but tell them you don't have 2 grooms and they can probably find that elsewhere, or find someone who's "more comfortable" putting 2 grooms on the top.

Everything I'm reading says he refused to make the wedding cake because it was for a homosexual wedding. So he refused to serve two customers because they were gay. What's the difference if it's for cupcakes or a gay wedding?

Here I'll let you read for yourself:

A family owned bakery has been ordered to make wedding cakes for gay couples and guarantee that its staff be given comprehensive training on Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws after the state’s Civil Rights Commission determined the Christian baker violated the law by refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, in Lakewood, Colorado was directed to change his store policies immediately and force his staff to attend the training sessions. For the next two years, Phillips will also be required to submit quarterly reports to the commission to confirm that he has not turned away customers based on their sexual orientation.


Nicolle Martin, an attorney with Alliance Defending Freedom, called the ruling Orwellian and said they are considering an appeal.

“They are turning people of faith into religious refugees,” Martin told me. “Is this the society that we want to live in – where people of faith are driven out of business?”

The controversy started in 2012 when a gay couple asked Phillips to make their wedding cake. Phillips politely declined, saying he could not make a cake promoting a same-sex ceremony because of his faith. He offered to make them any other baked item they wanted.

No one should ever have to walk into a store and wonder if they will be turned away just because of who they are,” Mullins added.

But that’s not what Phillips did. He was more than willing to make them a cupcake.

Jack doesn’t turn people away,” Martin told me. “There are just some events that he won’t lend his artistry to.”

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014...ing-cakes-undergo-sensitivity-training-after/

 

[baydoll]

You mean that "go and sin no more stuff"?

Psh.

Tigga please.

Well that's really insightful.

 

[vraiblonde]

No, they shouldn't.

So you don't think businesses have enough regulations without government telling them who they must and must not sell their product to? You think there should be *more* government oversight of small Mom & Pop businesses?

 

[vraiblonde]

Well that's really insightful.

I was being sarcastic, making fun of folks who conveniently leave that part out.

 

[baydoll]

Do I believe the gay couple would have changed their ways if the owners had baked them a cake and seized that as an opportunity to preach? I doubt it. But just like the rich man, not everyone will accept the Word. But they certainly won't accept it if we outright reject people we disagree with.

I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall here.

From the article I posted for Beta:

But that’s not what Phillips did. He was more than willing to make them a cupcake.

“Jack doesn’t turn people away,” Martin told me. “There are just some events that he won’t lend his artistry to.”

WHY you might ask?

Because:

“The Bible to me overrules all that and the Bible asks me to be obedient to Christ — and the Bible condemns certain things,”

I love my (gay) son UNCONDTIONALLY and he knows that. I support HIM. I DO NOT support what he DOES. I do things with my gay son and his SO, we go places together, they spend the holidays with us, as well as all our family get togethers, I go out to eat with them, so on and so forth. I do this because I love my SON and I love his SO as PEOPLE because they're wonderful, kind, funny, friendly, loving PEOPLE. I enjoy being with them.

BUT. If they were to ever decide to get married and asked me to be a part of that I would tell them NO.

NOT because of THEM AS PEOPLE but because I cannot be a part of what they are DOING. It is against what I believe in. And my son knows this. It doesn't hurt our relationship in the least. Matter of fact he respects me more because of it.

End of story.

 

[baydoll]

I was being sarcastic, making fun of folks who conveniently leave that part out.

Oh, sorry.

 

[SamSpade]

Sure it's a sin, you can't say (in accordance with the bible) that it isn't, however, so is coveting and adultery.

I'm much less critical of homosexuality than I used to be, and much more inclined to believe that they are born that way. As such, I find it hard to find fault with it, even though it still at some gut level kind of nauseates me.

But I really can't get around that the Bible calls it sin. So be it; I just tell people "ok, just say you disagree with it". That's how I feel. I disagree. I don't try and say the Bible DOESN'T condemn it, because it does. So we're in agreement there - we disagree with the Bible.

I think there's two aspects of why people get all in a kerfuffle over gays. The easy part is the gut level yuck factor - for straight people, an awful lot of them just are hugely turned off by it. I think that's driven a LOT of reaction over who does what with whom. It wasn't that long ago that having sex with someone of a different race was regarded as wrong by people. People are still kind of grossed out over hearing about elderly people getting it on - or very large people doing it. You just don't like it. Hearing that it is "sin" makes it easier to hate it.

But the other is driven in part by the Bible "sin" stuff. There's lots of stuff considered sin. Heck, if you THINK something is wrong and do it anyway - even if it's not strictly sin as defined by the Bible - it means you intended to do something you thought was wrong, and the Bible counts THAT as sin. The difference religious people have with gays is, they see it as unrepentant sin. There's no remorse, no contrition and a sense that it needs to be considered just ok. Try to think of other sins people do - somewhere along the line, they have a twinge of conscience that says, I really, REALLY should not have done that. Gays aren't doing that. I think Christians feel exactly the same way about people who are openly promiscuous, regardless of sexual preference. There's no intent whatsoever to repent.

One other thing - and I said there's just two I know of, but just an additional point - non-religious folks drive the media frenzy over homosexuality. I spent between 15-20 years of my life in various evangelical churches, some of them outright cults. I never heard even a single Sunday sermon or lesson specifically dumping on homosexuality. And there was a REALLY big reason - see, in these churches, it was considered sin - and some members had previously engaged in it, just as we had former drug dealers and prostitutes. They didn't go on these big judgmental tirades about gays, because they'd be insulting themselves. I'm inclined to believe that the press and non-religious types make a big deal about religious wackos who show up at funerals and do weird stuff. I think TV show writers make religious people almost ALWAYS hypocritical psychotics. MY experience for many years was generally compassion - even the cultists. They did OTHER stuff that would piss you off, but they didn't dump on gays.

 

[Beta]

OH so one side can now force the other to comply?

That sounds like slavery/communism.

We could always go back to where blacks are banned everywhere because white people don't want to sell them anything. Is it better if we are all allowed to discriminate? I'm sure someone would turn down bible thumpers too. Would you organize a rally against them? Let's call up Westboro Baptist!

Here I'll let you read for yourself:

Ugh, Fox News. Talk about a misinformed readership. But thank you for attempting to find something that would help provide further clarification.

Anyway, my point was that unless the cake was flaming gay where working on it offended him, i.e. something that a straight couple wouldn't order (like a penis cake), then I don't see where he had any complaint or reason not to fulfill the order. What he decided is that by making a cake, he was somehow promoting a gay wedding, but by offering to make them a bunch of cupcakes for their wedding, that wouldn't be promoting it. That smells like a completely BS story made up after the fact because he needed some kind of bogus excuse.

Don't believe everything you read. When it smells like a rat, it's a rat.

 

[Merlin99]

No, they shouldn't.

Yes they should, in fact they used to post signs stating exactly that "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". Just because you want to make government a nanny to everyone with hurt feelings doesn't mean that we all do.

 

[Zguy28]

Yes they should, in fact they used to post signs stating exactly that "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". Just because you want to make government a nanny to everyone with hurt feelings doesn't mean that we all do.

Its not a matter of "want to..." in Colorado (and most other states I think), its a matter of "its already the law."

 

[Zguy28]

We could always go back to where blacks are banned everywhere because white people don't want to sell them anything. Is it better if we are all allowed to discriminate? I'm sure someone would turn down bible thumpers too. Would you organize a rally against them? Let's call up Westboro Baptist!



Ugh, Fox News. Talk about a misinformed readership. But thank you for attempting to find something that would help provide further clarification.

Anyway, my point was that unless the cake was flaming gay where working on it offended him, i.e. something that a straight couple wouldn't order (like a penis cake), then I don't see where he had any complaint or reason not to fulfill the order. What he decided is that by making a cake, he was somehow promoting a gay wedding, but by offering to make them a bunch of cupcakes for their wedding, that wouldn't be promoting it. That smells like a completely BS story made up after the fact because he needed some kind of bogus excuse.

Don't believe everything you read. When it smells like a rat, it's a rat.

I'm no fan of Fox News, but this post also smells a little rattish or should I say judgmental of the baker and his motives?

 

[Beta]

I'm no fan of Fox News, but this post also smells a little rattish or should I say judgmental of the baker and his motives?

Explain a reasonable motive where a cake is promoting a gay wedding, but selling them cupcakes for a wedding doesn't promote a gay wedding. Excuse me? Please, make sense of it. If you can, then maybe I'll bite, but I actually put some thought into it. Thanks.

 

[Gilligan]

6-17-2014
Thus saith The Lord God YAH
Homosexuality is not a Disease - It is an Insanity that took Place When Lucifer Tricked 2 Billions Angels into Stealing Bodies which were in incubation for Human Spirits
YAH The Father of Jesus Had Already Sabotaged The Chambers with Things that would Drive Angels of Rebellion Insane... One Being Confusion! Confusion! It Was A Mistake
To Believe That YAH was Fool Enough Not To Sabotage Other Chambers After Lucifer Took A Body And Decieved Adam & Took A Body And Deceived Eve> Meaning
The 1st Sin Was Infidelity - as Eve was Tricked by The False Prophet into Believing Sex was Okay With Others Like Her [ Looked Like! ] Adam was the 1st to have a Homosexual Relationsship! As The Body He Slept With Was of A Female Body Stolen from the Archives of [ Being Prepared for Human Spirit Habitation ] ... However!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The False Prophet Who Stole The Human Transplanted Body> Meaning the Spirit of The False Prophet Was Inside - When Adam Had Sexual Relationship With The Stolen Corpse!
Corpse Because The Lord Had Not Yet Breathed Life Into It! Thus You Have The 1st Homosexual Being Lucifer's Protegee> The false Prophet! Lucifer Has Always Been In Custody!
But Before Capture Had The Knowledge To Transfer Over To His Protegee> Being How To Inhabit The Humans! It is always a Sin> Being Homosexual...
However, Some are Trapped Into It - Tricked and Repent In Time To Be Saved! Others Are Possed By Demons And Will Never Ever Again Know Self -
As They Have Given Themselves Over To That Particular Sin!

Well there ya go. I love this site..not a day goes by without me learning something new.