Mississippi has taken a bold step to defend religious liberty

[5GallonBucket]

9 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

So what our country was built on bible values that do not mean it cannot or will not change. We all favorite religion in politics now but what happens when it's another religion that's getting force about. Best way to keep religious freedom is kept it out of politics. The laws of the bible is common sense laws that almost all countries go by. It's called common sense. I don't see why anyone is bother about what another person choose to do with there life. I'll sell a gay a cake before I sell a drunk a beer. Or what about we ask for marriage licenses to get condoms lube etc etc. see this can go forever and ever and soon you'll have no one to sell too. Just say I dislike gays and for that reason I refuse to sell to you man up don't hide behind religion.

I dislike the sin and the enabling of it(govt). 

 

[PAMFAM10]

1 minute ago, 5GallonBucket said:

I dislike the sin and the enabling of it(govt). 

 

Shouldn't the government stay out of gays life too. Enabling what? basic human rights. 

[5GallonBucket]

6 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

You work with youth I grew up with this "youth" and I tell you if you think homosexuality is even a half percentage of the problem your far off. 

I never said I didn't see the importance of a dad mom child house hold but a gay man/woman will be gay I can't change that. And this bill or anything I ever seen proposed won't change that fact. We have gays and it's absolutely nothing that can be done about it no magical vaccine.

And for you to say homosexuality is not a problem your far off as well. 

Your right you can't change it, I can't change it, govt cant change it, but we don't have to enable it.   

A person shouldn't lose there business over it. 

There has been gays functioning in this world for a long time so why now is this such a hot issue?  Is it the Christians or the gays/political enthusiast doingeverything they can for votes, money, power.

Unbelievers will never understand why Christians make a stand. .

[5GallonBucket]

7 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Shouldn't the government stay out of gays life too. Enabling what? basic human rights. 

Yep you are right on that. ....no more gay marriages....

Do you know the reason why government is in gay's lives?

 

 

 

[westend1]

3 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

And for you to say homosexuality is not a problem your(you're} far off as well. 

Your right you can't change it, I can't change it, govt cant change it, but we don't have to enable it.   

A person shouldn't lose there(their) business over it. 

There has(have) been gays functioning in this world for a long time so why now is this such a hot issue?  Is it the Christians or the gays/political enthusiast doingeverything they can for votes, money, power.

Unbelievers will never understand why Christians make a stand. .

 

[PAMFAM10]

3 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

And for you to say homosexuality is not a problem your far off as well. 

Your right you can't change it, I can't change it, govt cant change it, but we don't have to enable it.   

A person shouldn't lose there business over it. 

There has been gays functioning in this world for a long time so why now is this such a hot issue?  Is it the Christians or the gays/political enthusiast doingeverything they can for votes, money, power.

Unbelievers will never understand why Christians make a stand. .

Guess I'm a unbelieving liberal (anything to make your argument fit) My question only one have ask if gays had nothing to do with your religious views would you still have a issue with gays.. If so yo see my point that this is not just a religious issue just called that to get the masses on board.

[Hagar]

3 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

Guess I'm a unbelieving liberal (anything to make your argument fit) My question only one have ask if gays had nothing to do with your religious views would you still have a issue with gays.. If so yo see my point that this is not just a religious issue just called that to get the masses on board.

This thing can be argued from several positions.   As I understand it, the Mississippi law was enacted because ownership of a Bakery didn't want to bake a wedding cake for gays for religious reasons (would be participating in sinful union).   IF they wouldn't bake them a regular cake, that would be discrimination.   So because they took a stand to avoid what they thot was a sin, they ended up getting sued, and had to pay, due to the Law in Oregon.  I think that Law is the one that should be under scrutiny.   Why?  Based on what I read, there's no reason you can refuse gays.  

Common sense?  Yes!   The couple could have went to another baker.   IF You owned a catering business, and a gay couple ask you to cater a party that you may think is perverted, shouldn't you have the right not to?   Common Sense says yes, but I don't think the Law in Oregon does.   Point is, there's got to be a point where the business owners right comes into play.  It can't be all one way!

[PAMFAM10]

4 hours ago, REBgp said:

This thing can be argued from several positions.   As I understand it, the Mississippi law was enacted because ownership of a Bakery didn't want to bake a wedding cake for gays for religious reasons (would be participating in sinful union).   IF they wouldn't bake them a regular cake, that would be discrimination.   So because they took a stand to avoid what they thot was a sin, they ended up getting sued, and had to pay, due to the Law in Oregon.  I think that Law is the one that should be under scrutiny.   Why?  Based on what I read, there's no reason you can refuse gays.  

Common sense?  Yes!   The couple could have went to another baker.   IF You owned a catering business, and a gay couple ask you to cater a party that you may think is perverted, shouldn't you have the right not to?   Common Sense says yes, but I don't think the Law in Oregon does.   Point is, there's got to be a point where the business owners right comes into play.  It can't be all one way!

I agree with common sense goes both ways.

[CraigS]

15 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

You work with youth I grew up with this "youth" and I tell you if you think homosexuality is even a half percentage of the problem your far off. 

I never said I didn't see the importance of a dad mom child house hold but a gay man/woman will be gay I can't change that. And this bill or anything I ever seen proposed won't change that fact. We have gays and it's absolutely nothing that can be done about it no magical vaccine.

So based on your logic: take gay out of your comment and insert - polygamist / prostitutes ...

 

Since consensual love allows gay marriage - why not legalize polygamy, it's just multiple people with consensual love.

Since abortion is allowed because it's the woman's body she can do with it what she wants - why not legalize prostitution, it's her body to sell.

You are correct, no law will keep us from having polygamist, prostitutes, or gays....but it at least keeps it to a minimum and in the shadows, not out, in your face telling our kids it's ok to live this lifestyle.

 

[stevenash]

2 hours ago, CraigS said:

So based on your logic: take gay out of your comment and insert - polygamist / prostitutes ...

 

Since consensual love allows gay marriage - why not legalize polygamy, it's just multiple people with consensual love.

Since abortion is allowed because it's the woman's body she can do with it what she wants - why not legalize prostitution, it's her body to sell.

You are correct, no law will keep us from having polygamist, prostitutes, or gays....but it at least keeps it to a minimum and in the shadows, not out, in your face telling our kids it's ok to live this lifestyle.

 

+!

[Hagar]

7 hours ago, PAMFAM10 said:

I agree with common sense goes both ways.

Exactly PF10.  I'm not cognizant of the whole Oregon Law, but the article, as I understood it, doesn't allow Any reason to refuse gays service.  That isn't common sense, nor makes any sense.  Thus the need for the Mississippi law to protect the business owners beliefs, be them Christian, Hindu, or Muslim.

Had the folks who created the law giving LGBT rights, used Common Sense, there would be no need for the Mississippi Law.  

[PAMFAM10]

27 minutes ago, stevenash said:

+!

I wouldn't care one bit if prostitution was legal or not I believe a person has every right to live their life however they see fit. As long as it doesn't affect others. I don't worry about others. And no law is going to keep it in the shadows gays or here they won't go away. Bills like this only emboldened them. 

[PAMFAM10]

3 hours ago, CraigS said:

So based on your logic: take gay out of your comment and insert - polygamist / prostitutes ...

 

Since consensual love allows gay marriage - why not legalize polygamy, it's just multiple people with consensual love.

Since abortion is allowed because it's the woman's body she can do with it what she wants - why not legalize prostitution, it's her body to sell.

You are correct, no law will keep us from having polygamist, prostitutes, or gays....but it at least keeps it to a minimum and in the shadows, not out, in your face telling our kids it's ok to live this lifestyle.

 

And then it comes to the question can a person be born gay? Polygamist? Or prostitute?... Choosing to be gay today why would anybody choose that.

[stevenash]

19 minutes ago, PAMFAM10 said:

And then it comes to the question can a person be born gay? Polygamist? Or prostitute?... Choosing to be gay today why would anybody choose that.

Because the government makes you a protected class?

[bullets13]

On 4/26/2016 at 8:45 AM, CraigS said:

Maybe it's your interpretation skills or lack thereof. No one is saying one sin is better or worse than another. All that is being said is, no one should have to "assist" another in doing "that" particular sin....in simple English.........Christians would not assist said sin to take place.... murder, rape, etc. knowingly either.

 

It's also been said...What would Jesus do? He would love the sinner, hate the sin...he would not deny them services (food, housing, clothing, etc)......however, I feel quite certain, He would NOT perform their marriage or partake in said ceremony.

 

On another note, they probably weren't celebrating her "out of wedlock" birth...probably just celebrating LIFE...but that doesn't fit your agenda....perhaps by liberal thinking, she should have just aborted!

I assure you my "interpretation skills" are more than adequate, especially when no interpretation is needed.  However, i must ask, since you say that Christians would not assist sin to take place: are there not millions of Christians across the country involved in the selling of alcohol?   Lots of sin is derived from alcohol, but Christians aren't boycotting stores that sell it.  Why is that?  That's a sin that most Christians like to partake in themselves.  And yes, i understand that alcohol can be used without getting drunk, but what percentage of drinkers never get drunk?  The number is going to be tiny.  I know plenty of "good Christians" who drink as hard on Friday and Saturday as they pray on Sunday.  

And sure, they were just celebrating life.  But my "liberal agenda" has nothing to do with a DIVORCED man having a party for the birth of his grandchild that was CONCEIVED OUT OF WEDLOCK, getting DRUNK, and then going on a tirade about how "queers are ruining the country" and "throwing their sin in our face".  Which yes, they are putting their sin out there for everyone to see, but no more than the long litany of sins that my buddy was shoving in my face.   The irony wasn't lost on me, even if you choose to ignore it.  

[bullets13]

On 4/26/2016 at 0:40 PM, CraigS said:

I understand your point, but on this matter, it isn't hiding behind religion, it is a legit discrimination against religious freedoms. 

My answer (and will piss some off) would be the same if we were talking about having sex with your (insert pet here), it's flat out GROSS! AND religious beliefs....One can have more than ONE reason to have negative opinions about such activity.

 

The best thing said so far is to use common sense....something that has long left the people who make law in this country....it has been replaced with PC, the most dangerous reason for doing anything...IMO

How come you don't feel as strongly about out of wedlock sexual activity?  That one's not as bad as the others because you did it, right?

[bullets13]

23 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

 

the whole argument of" well we all sin so lets make everything legal"  do you really want to open that can of worms.

The reason this sin could be looked at as worse from the human perspective "its easily visible" and they are practicing the sin.  And yes there are Christians that practice sinning as well(your friend and his 9 beers) ...  either case doesn't make it right. 

two wrongs don't make a right

I like how liberals like to use Christians that sin to justify such things.....

I like how Christians use Christianity to justify discrimination and outrage at certain groups of sinners, but don't use it to discriminate against the ones they like to partake in.  

[bullets13]

3 hours ago, stevenash said:

Because the government makes you a protected class?

Yup, people are just lining up to take abuse and discrimination and outrage from our good Christian country so that they can be a "protected class".  That's much more appealing than just staying straight and not needing intervention to gain basic rights.  Makes total sense.  Definitely worth taking it from behind for.  But lets say that you your hypothesis is correct, and that's why 100% of homosexuals are currently homosexual. if so, what made them make the "choice" back when it was still okay to deny them all service, beat the crap out of them, or even kill them because they were gay, with minimal fear of reprisal?

[Whoa]

Problem is all don't believe the same - I am Catholic we can take alcohol in moderation, we dance and have instruments in church.  Some don't believe in that..  There is one poster that doesn't believe in drink, instruments and all non church of Christ peeps are a going to hell (FUNNNNNNY)  the Pope and all the na sayers will meet up there and get turned back around.

Why cant we make all legal and just choose what WE want to do - drink, weed, queers, holy rollers and maybe let the Catholics eat drink and be merry.

 

Just a proposal  

[stevenash]

18 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

Yup, people are just lining up to take abuse and discrimination and outrage from our good Christian country so that they can be a "protected class".  That's much more appealing than just staying straight and not needing intervention to gain basic rights.  Makes total sense.  Definitely worth taking it from behind for.  But lets say that you your hypothesis is correct, and that's why 100% of homosexuals are currently homosexual. if so, what made them make the "choice" back when it was still okay to deny them all service, beat the crap out of them, or even kill them because they were gay, with minimal fear of reprisal?

Sorry, but under no circumstance will I ever consider the gay wedding cake a basic right.  Please convince me that said cake as well as the transgender bathrooms are basic rights.

[Whoa]

59 minutes ago, stevenash said:

Sorry, but under no circumstance will I ever consider the gay wedding cake a basic right.  Please convince me that said cake as well as the transgender bathrooms are basic rights.

why wouldn't they be a BASIC RIGHT???  aren't we free to express our views and opinions -- just like you are doing??-

How would a gay cake infringe on your rights.

Does the gay thing make you nervous??

[bullets13]

1 hour ago, stevenash said:

Sorry, but under no circumstance will I ever consider the gay wedding cake a basic right.  Please convince me that said cake as well as the transgender bathrooms are basic rights.

on both cases i happen to agree with you.  there are plenty of legitimate rights that have been trampled on throughout the years, however.

[CraigS]

On 4/26/2016 at 2:36 PM, PAMFAM10 said:

You work with youth I grew up with this "youth" and I tell you if you think homosexuality is even a half percentage of the problem your far off. 

I never said I didn't see the importance of a dad mom child house hold but a gay man/woman will be gay I can't change that. And this bill or anything I ever seen proposed won't change that fact. We have gays and it's absolutely nothing that can be done about it no magical vaccine.

So based on your logic: take gay out of your comment and insert - polygamist / prostitutes ...

 

Since consensual love allows gay marriage - why not legalize polygamy, it's just multiple people with consensual love.

Since abortion is allowed because it's the woman's body she can do with it what she wants - why not legalize prostitution, it's her body to sell.

You are correct, no law will keep us from having polygamist, prostitutes, or gays....but it at least keeps it to a minimum and in the shadows, not out, in your face telling our kids it's ok to live this lifestyle.

 

[CraigS]

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

How come you don't feel as strongly about out of wedlock sexual activity?  That one's not as bad as the others because you did it, right?

If I have to explain why 2 men having sex isn't the same as opposite sexes having sex out of wedlock in the context of my comment - GROSS, then we'll just leave it at that.

On the Christian side of things - yes, I did commit that sin. However, I assure you my parents (Christians) did not knowingly contribute to my sinful ways by openly allowing me to use their home for said activity.......oh snap, a very revealing moment for me....my parents, my very own parents discriminated against me........I now must commit suicide! 

Again, A) you have limited comprehensive skills - 'B) slow to understand - C) or just argue to argue....there is no option D 

[CraigS]

2 hours ago, bullets13 said:

I assure you my "interpretation skills" are more than adequate, especially when no interpretation is needed.  However, i must ask, since you say that Christians would not assist sin to take place: are there not millions of Christians across the country involved in the selling of alcohol?   Lots of sin is derived from alcohol, but Christians aren't boycotting stores that sell it.  Why is that?  That's a sin that most Christians like to partake in themselves.  And yes, i understand that alcohol can be used without getting drunk, but what percentage of drinkers never get drunk?  The number is going to be tiny.  I know plenty of "good Christians" who drink as hard on Friday and Saturday as they pray on Sunday.  

And sure, they were just celebrating life.  But my "liberal agenda" has nothing to do with a DIVORCED man having a party for the birth of his grandchild that was CONCEIVED OUT OF WEDLOCK, getting DRUNK, and then going on a tirade about how "queers are ruining the country" and "throwing their sin in our face".  Which yes, they are putting their sin out there for everyone to see, but no more than the long litany of sins that my buddy was shoving in my face.   The irony wasn't lost on me, even if you choose to ignore it.  

selling, buying or drinking alcohol is not a sin, various activities that some "blame" on alcohol are sins....again, you just make stuff up to fit your agenda. 

 

If your friend never told you that his sin was better than the other - then YES, the irony was lost on you, because there wasn't any....you inserted your own interpretation (agenda) of that into the repeating of the situation.