Christian Artists Could Be Fined, Jailed for Refusing to Make Same-Sex Wedding Invita

What a man decides to stick his penis in, is absolutely a choice. There are many forms of perversion, most are outlawed, this specific one use to be. After dropping our disciplines required to uphold our principalities, more and more evil will grow, and more and more perversions will come.

Good will become evil, and evil will become good. As it is written.

 

It may shock you but there are gay Christians having sex (both marital and extramarital) just as there are heterosexual Christians having sex (both marital and extramarital.) There are Christian denominations that consecrate marriages for both.

Meanwhile, there are no Christian denominations that declare making wedding invitations of any sort to be a sin.

Glad that I could clarify those matters for you!

 

I've wondered how such cases would go for wedding facilities that offer ONLY a specific worded marriage ceremony that contained Bible verses stating marriage is a man and a woman - THAT is part of the public service they offer - specifically and only offering to perform THAT specific marriage ceremony. And the facility has verses on the wall also stating marriage is a man and a woman, and even anti-gay verses they refuse to cover up for anyone.

I know of a couple of Christian chapels with huge crosses and other Christian symbols "open to the public" for hire by have always refused requests to cover the Christian cross or remove any pictures or posters from the wall.

A gay, Hindu or atheist could hire THAT ceremony and that facility as it is, but it would be quoting the Christian Bible as the ONLY service offered to anyone nor would cover or remove anything the couple finds offensive.

Would that constitute illegal discrimination?

 

Well, since you just declared you are an expert on the beliefs and doctrine of every church and organization that calls itself Christian, do enlighten us with your resume that is the basis of your expertise.

Also, what specific Christian denomination are you a member of? Do you believe in infant baptism or baptism at the age of accountability? Where do you stand whether it is literally the body and blood of Jesus during communion? How often do you attend communion and at what age were you baptized?

 

Non-Christian self-declared progressives love to try to dictate what Christianity is and how Christians must and must not act. Generally, such messages come across as written from arrogant idiocy and are worthless in general.

 

Yep - you went right into it...

YOU are the one who intentionally took a bogus news story and posted it. Spin, spin, spin away. And then deny, deny, deny. And then twist, twist and twist some more.

 

A marriage ceremony carries NO weight in law to the federal government nor in most states. Only the signing of a marriage license constitutes a legal marriage. Thus, denying conducting a marriage ceremony does not deny anyone the legal ability or right to be married whatsoever as the ceremony is 100% irrelevant to whether or not the couple is married.

In fact, a wedding officiate is nothing more than a hired actor - for which the question is whether anyone can order the lines an actor must or must not say. However, I am fairly confident any actor otherwise can refuse to do any performance the actor does not want to for whatever reason that is.

Accordingly, a commercial wedding chapel also is nothing more than a theater. Can a theater refuse to allow any performance? Or is that discriminatory? Could Universal Studios refuse to rent out their facilities for a pro KKK movie and could any actor refuse if the production claims the values of the KKK are a religious belief including the burning of crosses? It would seem in principle they could not without it constituting illegal discrimination.

The BIG LIE told in these debates is the claim that a marriage ceremony has ANYTHING to do with whether or not a couple is married or with the legal act of becoming married - and it does not. A marriage ceremony is nothing more than theater for which the officiate and all others professionals are no more than stage hands, actors, making the props and other aspects of the theater production.

The ONLY "discrimination" on any legal level would be refusal to sign the marriage license IF that service is offered.

 

feel free to show all of us a test which confirms that one is born wanting gay-sex

 

you are missing the point and I feel on purpose

In ALL cases, the Christians gladly sell to everyone; they don't serve celebrations of gay-sex

 

let's consider the poor florist who has lost her business because of 2 butt-hurt homosexual men

She sold flowers to them over the years and probably to other people who also engage in sorts of deviant sex. When they came to her and asked for her to use her talent at their celebration of gay-sex, she as a Christian must refuse.

The 2 men then did what seems to be thing to do and I'm not talking about going down the street to another florist; nope, they sued.

- - - Updated - - -

it comes down to the gay activists and their agenda

 

Your ignorance of Christianity again shows. Just because I claim to be a neurosurgeon doesn't mean that I am one. Gay sex = not Christian

If one stops having gay-sex then welcome aboard

 

Or, perhaps, Bob, in a fit of petulant rage, decides to close up shop leaving no shop whatsoever in town.

What, you say? Someone else will open? What's to stop them from opening up while Bob is still in business? My concern is the moment we begin to see the group as being more privileged than the individual, we really cease to be the Nation we profess to be. We are no longer a nation of individual rights and instead have reverted to mob rule.

 

I agree with that point. I can't help but think that the people that run or own these businesses that get sued are incredibly obnoxious about how they refuse leading to the suit. There are any number of reasons for a business not to take on a client and the potential client is not owed an explanation why. If you respond with 'I don't like your kind', you're begging for a human rights case against you.

 

You may be confused and mean Gay sex = not Muslim - and, unfortunately, homophobia is still rampant in Islam.

This may help you correct your mistaken notion of Christianity, and you can link to the site to see the various denominations' various positions encapsulated:

Those Christians and Churches which support blessing of same-sex unions do so from several perspectives:

• It is an affirmative good that stands alongside straight marriage and committed monastic celibacy as a revelation of God's self in the world.
  
  
• The logical coherence of the core Christian doctrines such as the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Resurrection and the Ascension is improved through the integration of gay marriage into the Christian conception of marriage.
  
  
• Our understanding of marriage as a metaphor of Christ’s relationship with the Church is strengthened by assimilating gay marriage into that metaphor.
  
  
• Some scholars maintain that scripture in the original languages contains no prohibition of homosexuality, but does record same-sex marriage. "But if we take a closer look, reading the scripture in the original Hebrew and Greek, we discover that God never condemned homosexuality, and that same-sex marriage existed in Bible times." "To tell a homosexual that the Bible is Good News, (but that) it says that their ability to love on a one-to-one basis (mate level) means they are sinful and perverted in God's eyes is a gross contradiction in terms. What's more, God is not saying this to gay people. God's Word is this: For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16, KJV). And that is the Good News for modern gays."
  
  
• The biblic references to homosexuality were uttered in the context of promiscuous same-sex practices of Hellenistic cultures (Paul) and cultures surrounding the people of Israel (Deut). This kind of sex without love was often practiced in lieu of going to female prostitutes, also by heterosexual men. It is a discriminating misconception of our times to transfer that prohibition of such promiscuous practice without love to what we discuss here: durable, long term, choosy same-sex unions.

​

Of course, you may entertain ypur personal prejudices, but you do not speak for all Christians.

 

You are confused. For the varying positions of various Christian denominations, see the link above. No one can presume to dictate to all Christian sects.


.

 

That would be an opportunity for Wally to expand and add a burger stand to Wally's Wonderful World of Wallets - and an efficient use of both the cow's hide and meat.

All the Wallys, Freds, Clydes, and Bobs would be lining up!

Capitalism succeeds for everyone when it serves all the People!

 

Actually I mostly agree. Where I will part ways is if you don't like how someone is doing business either take your money elsewhere or better yet compete and offer better service, option, etc. The market is an amazing equalizer when properly utilized. Don't wait for the government to level your playing field, be the solution you desire.

On a side note there can actually be good money in serving overlooked niche markets. Go to any town that does not already have one and open a Single Malt Whiskey and high end Bourbon Cigar Bar. You'll be soon looking to buy out the businesses to either side of you to knock down the walls and expand.

 

That's a decided issue. You can look it up as easily as I can.

Beyond that, as a practical matter there are essentially zero adult humans who can legitimately claim that they changed the gender to which they were originally sexually attracted.

Humans just don't come so neatly "packaged" as XX or XY.

 

Asking somebody to use their talent to create something they don't agree with is very different than asking somebody to sell a generic product they had no personal investment in.

You do see that, don't you?

 

In any event, the once "Whites Only" lunch counters have expanded their customer base to their economic advantage despite their resistance to their customers exercising their constitutional rights to equality.

I have an affinity for the more refined Irish whiskeys (as opposed to Scottish whisky) but the imminent proliferation of Cubans cigars (and vintage automobile re-importations) are promising opportunities for Bob who has gotten out of his discriminatory burger business.)

Alas, where have all the pipe smokers gone?

 

While I agree with you that for the VAST majority of gays, their sexuality is most definitely not a choice but something they are born with, I still do not agree with legal compulsion to perform service.

If they refused to sell existing products, that's one thing.

Some thing like producing artwork is another animal entirely.

 

The same test that proves we are born sinners because a snake talked a naked lady into eating an apple.

Nope. I am familiar with several cases involving people using their business to push their religious agenda and while I don't like to see people losing their businesses while lawyers get rich, they made their own bed. If you want to push religion, open a church. If you want to push products and services, open a business. Keep the two separate.

 

I just don't see a line there.

Is cooking a high end dinner art? Is the Limo driver performing a service? Etc., etc.

The only real line is that of operating as a business in the public space. That line is in the law.


Also, I don't remember Jesus shunning folks who didn't share his beliefs. Does this idea come from Paul's letters to small communities of Christians suggesting that they keep their private lives separate lest they backslide?

 

That baker would be in violation of the accommodation laws related to religion.

That baker would be in violation of the accommodation laws related to orientation.

False, the religious right have imposed marriage limitations, military service requirements, contractural limitations, visition limitations, and so on for decades.

Either remove all public accommodation or expect fights like this over the country. Courts seem to agree unwarranted discrimination violates equal protections.

As a white person, no one cares how bent out of shape you are over the issue. Your race and religion do seem to indicate why you are not for the complete removal of accommodation laws though - scared of being told your kind isn't welcome here?

 

Adulter = not Christian according to your example but that doesn't stop you.
You don't get to dictate others beliefs anymore than they get to dictate yours.

Why do you feel you get to speak for the lord?