Mississippi has taken a bold step to defend religious liberty

[CraigS]

But this is't a thread discussing that aspect of it. It is discussing the religious aspect, you know the SIN part as to why businesses can refuse service.......but it doesn't promote the agenda to stay on topic as well as dragging other issues into the discussion....it makes it more sensitive to compare.

[Bobcat1]

You're going to go out of business if you refuse business to sinners.

[LumRaiderFan]

46 minutes ago, CraigS said:

But this is't a thread discussing that aspect of it. It is discussing the religious aspect, you know the SIN part as to why businesses can refuse service.......but it doesn't promote the agenda to stay on topic as well as dragging other issues into the discussion....it makes it more sensitive to compare.

Exactly right!

[LumRaiderFan]

38 minutes ago, Bobcat1 said:

You're going to go out of business if you refuse business to sinners.

OK, then problem solved, right?

[Bobcat1]

30 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

OK, then problem solved, right?

Isn't everyone a sinner? You'd have to refuse service to everyone or do you get to pick what sin you disagree with?

[westend1]

25 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

OK, then problem solved, right?

Yeah, unless I live in a small town and my sole internet provider doesn't like gays, or blacks, or Muslims.  I f the group you choose to discriminate against is small enough, then you can discriminate without the economic consequences.   Did the southerners who refused to serve blacks fix that problem, or was it the feds?

[LumRaiderFan]

1 minute ago, westend1 said:

Yeah, unless I live in a small town and my sole internet provider doesn't like gays, or blacks, or Muslims.  I f the group you choose to discriminate against is small enough, then you can discriminate without the economic consequences.   Did the southerners who refused to serve blacks fix that problem, or was it the feds?

You have any examples of this happening LATELY?

No, and the comparison between blacks and homosexuals is a poor one.

 

[LumRaiderFan]

11 minutes ago, Bobcat1 said:

I don't understand your reply.

If a business chooses to do something based on their religious beliefs and it offends the majority like so many have said on here, they will lose so much business they will have to shut down.

Problem solved for the LGBT supporters.

Kinda like Chi-fil-A... oh wait.

[Bobcat1]

1 minute ago, LumRaiderFan said:

If a business chooses to do something based on their religious beliefs and it offends the majority like so many have said on here, they will lose so much business they will have to shut down.

Problem solved for the LGBT supporters.

Kinda like Chi-fil-A... oh wait.

Chick-fil-a didn't say they weren't going to serve anyone that was gay...

[LumRaiderFan]

6 minutes ago, Bobcat1 said:

Chick-fil-a didn't say they weren't going to serve anyone that was gay...

No they didn't, they simply took a stance on gay marriage...and business increased short term.

[bullets13]

1 hour ago, Bobcat1 said:

You're going to go out of business if you refuse business to sinners.

No, the beauty of hypocrisy is that you get to CHOOSE which sinners are okay and which sinners should be shunned. 

[LumRaiderFan]

26 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

No, the beauty of hypocrisy is that you get to CHOOSE which sinners are okay and which sinners should be shunned. 

That cuts both ways...if a customer went into a black owned bakery and ordered a KKK cake and was refused or a customer went into a Muslim owned bakery and ordered a "I love Bacon" cake and was refused, we wouldn't hear a peep out of you or several others on this board.

I feel in both cases, they have a right to deny the service.

Somehow, some think that this will open the floodgates to millions of Christians that are standing by waiting to force their beliefs down someone's throat.

[Bobcat1]

I thought we were talking about sins only - Isn't that what CraigS said?

[baddog]

Here's one to ponder.....a gay man walks into the "cake shop" and has to use the restroom. He decides to use the ladie's room. Now, just where is your freakin discrimination going to kick in?

Everyone draws lines. Don't insult me and act like you (collectively)  don't. You bleeding hearts really kill me. You have no stance.

I hear Target will be the first to open its restroom doors as his/her. Hey, they can save money and only furnish one facility. Just another reason for me not to shop there. Oops, that would be discriminating. 

 

[TxHoops]

I have known more than a few people in my lifetime who believe interracial relationships are forbidden by the Bible.  A poor interpretation of the "unequally yoked" scripture to be sure, but nonetheless those persons' "Christian" beliefs. I only mention it to point out the comparison actually isn't far fetched at all.  

LRF - your bakery examples are interesting points.  I would draw a significant distinction on the KKK analogy for obvious reasons but the "I heart bacon" cake example is on point IMO.  

I do get the point that a gay wedding cake does invoke religious principles.  I realize most of you guys do not agree with gays' right to marriage, but are probably more offended with the idea of having to "condone" these marriages by having to directly participate in the marriages (I.e., cake).  I get that and the religious freedom argument.    And for what it's worth, I would have a much bigger problem with someone refusing to sell a dozen cookies to a gay person than the wedding cake issue.  

[Hagar]

13 hours ago, TxHoops said:

I have known more than a few people in my lifetime who believe interracial relationships are forbidden by the Bible.  A poor interpretation of the "unequally yoked" scripture to be sure, but nonetheless those persons' "Christian" beliefs. I only mention it to point out the comparison actually isn't far fetched at all.  

LRF - your bakery examples are interesting points.  I would draw a significant distinction on the KKK analogy for obvious reasons but the "I heart bacon" cake example is on point IMO.  

I do get the point that a gay wedding cake does invoke religious principles.  I realize most of you guys do not agree with gays' right to marriage, but are probably more offended with the idea of having to "condone" these marriages by having to directly participate in the marriages (I.e., cake).  I get that and the religious freedom argument.    And for what it's worth, I would have a much bigger problem with someone refusing to sell a dozen cookies to a gay person than the wedding cake issue.  

Agree 100%.   To not sell cookies to a gay fits about everyone's definition of discrimination.   The cake issue is another deal.  Admittedly, I'm an admirer of people that have small businesses.   Takes a lot of guts.  

[LumRaiderFan]

21 hours ago, TxHoops said:

I have known more than a few people in my lifetime who believe interracial relationships are forbidden by the Bible.  A poor interpretation of the "unequally yoked" scripture to be sure, but nonetheless those persons' "Christian" beliefs. I only mention it to point out the comparison actually isn't far fetched at all.  

LRF - your bakery examples are interesting points.  I would draw a significant distinction on the KKK analogy for obvious reasons but the "I heart bacon" cake example is on point IMO.  

I do get the point that a gay wedding cake does invoke religious principles.  I realize most of you guys do not agree with gays' right to marriage, but are probably more offended with the idea of having to "condone" these marriages by having to directly participate in the marriages (I.e., cake).  I get that and the religious freedom argument.    And for what it's worth, I would have a much bigger problem with someone refusing to sell a dozen cookies to a gay person than the wedding cake issue.  

Yes, it is.

[stevenash]

Just how far are we going to go in regard to allowing government ( which is totally void of any shred of business sense) dictate how businesses are operated?

[Hagar]

Thanks to our Government, as you can see by this thread, we have a puzzle with many pieces that don't fit.  Previously I posted IF the owners of the bakery perceived the request as participating in something to them that was a sin, they were justified.   And that defense would be difficult to prove and could lead some to abuse it.   I don't know what the dialogue was between these folks, but understanding would go a long way.  IF the owners explained their position, but said, if you ever want one for a birthday or another reason, come back.  Then IF the couple had just went to another bakery, no problem.   

The bottom line, again imo, is the Government has given "Special Rights" to some groups, and invariably those "Rights" are going to infringe on the rights of others.  You've heard the expression, "lead us down a slippery slope"?   This is a prime example.  And the law in Oregon, as I understand it, doesn't allow the business owner Any rights for any reason.

Let me ask All of you one question based on this scenario.   Your family owns & operates a catering business.  A gay couple decide to have a nude party and they want you to cater it (currently there are plans for a nude restaurant in England & they have 16,000 requests to attend already, so this scenario is not far fetched).  If you cater, your whole family will be exposed to all this.   Would you do it, or pay the inevitable lawsuit?   

[UTfanatic]

On April 21, 2016 at 4:23 PM, baddog said:

Here's one to ponder.....a gay man walks into the "cake shop" and has to use the restroom. He decides to use the ladie's room. Now, just where is your freakin discrimination going to kick in?

Everyone draws lines. Don't insult me and act like you (collectively)  don't. You bleeding hearts really kill me. You have no stance.

I hear Target will be the first to open its restroom doors as his/her. Hey, they can save money and only furnish one facility. Just another reason for me not to shop there. Oops, that would be discriminating. 

 

Or do you twice as many bathrooms available?

[CraigS]

First to understand the difference of "my opinion" and "the law".....To my understanding, this is a thread about your opinion of the law.....SO. IMO discrimination only occurs if it's against someone due to uncontrolable existence or circumstances....race - sex - disability ......notice I didnt say sex you "identify" as or sexual "preference"......and yes, I left out religion as well (another choice). 

as far as those who argue it isn't a choice to be gay or trans.......maybe...maybe not....but it is your choice to act on the behavior.......one could argue, murders, rapist, thieves, wife beaters, cheaters were ALL "born that way" .....but it's not illegal to withhold services from them...

[PAMFAM10]

Sometimes we just have to use common sense and also accept the reality of every situation. I don't believe most sane individuals have a problem with refusal of service for obvious reasons examples already used( church for a gay marriage black owner making kkk cake and Muslim with the bacon and you can etc etc.)Call it common sense freedom act. Religious freedom act just make it hypocritical. because if your that religious and not just discriminating than who could you sell to we all sin were all sinners. 

[PAMFAM10]

And for those who believe that comparing gays to blacks is far off I'll say this it always start with belief that something is wrong with a group they shouldn't be allowed to do this or that. Throw a bible verse in to support it. Have politicians back it and bam open discrimination. It's a cake today might be schools water fountains etc. tomorrow whites/colored to straight/gays.

[stevenash]

And people who want to marry their horse in the future?

[westend1]

On 4/21/2016 at 4:23 PM, baddog said:

Here's one to ponder.....a gay man walks into the "cake shop" and has to use the restroom. He decides to use the ladie's room. Now, just where is your freakin discrimination going to kick in?

Everyone draws lines. Don't insult me and act like you (collectively)  don't. You bleeding hearts really kill me. You have no stance.

I hear Target will be the first to open its restroom doors as his/her. Hey, they can save money and only furnish one facility. Just another reason for me not to shop there. Oops, that would be discriminating. 

 

What are you talking about?  I have seen plenty of women use the mens room when the line was too long.  It's really not a big deal.  You need to be insulted because puritans like you(as opposed to bleeding hearts, since name calling is allowed), are freakin, idiots, to language which you apparently understand .