[quote]zecarlo wrote:
What if it is the law and is in effect regardless of contract?[/quote]
To answer the question about the teacher(and whether or not she should be obligated), I have to know whether or not it is part of her employment contract. I have already said that I do not support such a law.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Bigotry requires hate and intolerance. Christians are supposed to love sinners.[/quote]
So what then if I don’t make a wedding cake with two-mini grooms on top for a homosexual couple? Refraining from participating in a private social expression one has already publicly tweeted opposition to is evidence of “hate and intolerance?”
And, isn’t ordering the cake an act of expression? Isn’t the cake expressing something? That’s the point of it being a WEDDING cake, no?
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
What if it is the law and is in effect regardless of contract?[/quote]
To answer the question about the teacher, I have to know whether or not it is part of her employment contract. I have already said that I do not support such a law.[/quote]
It is the law. Are you that unaware? Who gets protected by your position? Children or those who oppress them? Your position chooses one oppression over another. I would rather suffer the oppression of being obligated to report abuse in order to prevent oppression of children.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Bigotry requires hate and intolerance. Christians are supposed to love sinners.[/quote]
So what then if I don’t make a wedding cake with two-mini grooms on top for a homosexual couple? Refraining from participating in a private social expression one has already publicly tweeted opposition to is evidence of “hate and intolerance?”
And, isn’t ordering the cake an act of expression? Isn’t the cake expressing something? That’s the point of it being a WEDDING cake, no?
[/quote]
Your post is unintelligible.
So, what then if I refuse to make a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
Refraining from participation in a private social expression–which one has already publicly tweeted opposition to—is evidence of “hate and intolerance?”
And, isn’t ordering the cake an act of expression? Isn’t the cake expressing something? That’s the point of it being a WEDDING cake, no?
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
It is the law. Are you that unaware? Who gets protected by your position? Children or those who oppress them? Your position chooses one oppression over another. I would rather suffer the oppression of being obligated to report abuse in order to prevent oppression of children. [/quote]
You asked whether I support such a mandate, so I told you I need to know if it’s in the teacher’s contract. I know it is the law, but that doesn’t mean that I must blindly support it.
Do you really need the government to force you to do that which you believe is the right thing?
Fast-forward to about the 2:00-2:10 mark to see Ron Paul’s impression of you, if you truly need the government to do that.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So, what then if I refuse to make a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
Refraining from participation in a private social expression–which one has already publicly tweeted opposition to—is evidence of “hate and intolerance?”
And, isn’t ordering the cake an act of expression? Isn’t the cake expressing something? That’s the point of it being a WEDDING cake, no?
[/quote]
I don’t understand the questions. I will say that if every business, every single one, in America refused to serve a particular group then that group could not function and possibly not even survive. Imagine if those who sold food refused to sell to them. That’s not Christian. It’s not humane. It’s not even manly.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So, what then if I refuse to make a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
Refraining from participation in a private social expression–which one has already publicly tweeted opposition to—is evidence of “hate and intolerance?”
And, isn’t ordering the cake an act of expression? Isn’t the cake expressing something? That’s the point of it being a WEDDING cake, no?
[/quote]
I don’t understand the questions. I will say that if every business, every single one, in America refused to serve a particular group then that group could not function and possibly not even survive. Imagine if those who sold food refused to sell to them. That’s not Christian. It’s not humane. It’s not even manly.[/quote]
What about wedding cakes? Or, having to photograph a gay wedding? Refusal of service, or not?
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
It is the law. Are you that unaware? Who gets protected by your position? Children or those who oppress them? Your position chooses one oppression over another. I would rather suffer the oppression of being obligated to report abuse in order to prevent oppression of children. [/quote]
You asked whether I support such a mandate, so I told you I need to know if it’s in the teacher’s contract. I know it is the law, but that doesn’t mean that I must blindly support it.
Do you really need the government to force you to do that which you believe is the right thing?
Fast-forward to about the 2:00-2:10 mark to see Ron Paul’s impression of you, if you truly need the government to do that.
[/quote]
If men were angels.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
So, what then if I refuse to make a wedding cake for a homosexual couple?
Refraining from participation in a private social expression–which one has already publicly tweeted opposition to—is evidence of “hate and intolerance?”
And, isn’t ordering the cake an act of expression? Isn’t the cake expressing something? That’s the point of it being a WEDDING cake, no?
[/quote]
I don’t understand the questions. I will say that if every business, every single one, in America refused to serve a particular group then that group could not function and possibly not even survive. Imagine if those who sold food refused to sell to them. That’s not Christian. It’s not humane. It’s not even manly.[/quote]
What about wedding cakes? Or, having to photograph a gay wedding? Refusal of service, or not?[/quote]
It’s not Christian. It’s also hypocrisy if it doesn’t apply to all sinners. Legally, you want to receive the benefits of the collective then you can’t deny others the same benefits.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If men were angels.[/quote]
…I would have no problem with a few having the legal authority to rule others.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If men were angels.[/quote]
…I would have no problem with a few having the legal authority to rule others.[/quote]
Not exactly how the quote goes.
I’m asking if a Christian–an actual Christian–should be threatened by the state to produce a wedding cake for homosexual weddings.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
It’s not Christian. [/quote]
Who decided that, by the way? The government?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I really don’t want to turn this into another gay marriage thread but I have a question: should a pastor/bishop/priest who believes gay marriage to be a sin be required under penalty of law to professionally officiate at a gay wedding?
If your answer is no then tell me why the baker is different from the pastor.
Andy, let’s start with you.[/quote]
Do churches follow the same laws as other public businesses? I’m not sure the comparison is valid. Businesses are generally open to the public which are what the discrimination laws are for, are mormon temples like that? It’s more of an invite only thing vs all free to come in, unless we say no.[/quote]
Doesn’t have to be in a church building.
Let’s say the gay couple wanted a wedding down by the riverside 100 miles away from the nearest church. So they call Pastor John F Humpenstickenstein from the Calvary Baptist Church or Father Joe W PeterThouArtMyRock from the Catholic diocese and request he perform the vows. If the men refuse to do so on the grounds of immorality should District Attorney Richard S ConstitutionBeDamned step in and file charges against them?
[/quote]
Not the same thing. Asking someone to actively aid in the commission of a sin is different than providing a cake.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
It’s also hypocrisy if it doesn’t apply to all sinners. [/quote]
And? We’re talking about religious liberty now going down the drain, not potential private hypocrisy.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Not the same thing. Asking someone to actively aid in the commission of a sin is different than providing a cake. [/quote]
Um, homosexual marriage is a sin in Christianity…
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
If men were angels.[/quote]
…I would have no problem with a few having the legal authority to rule others.[/quote]
Not exactly how the quote goes.[/quote]
If you were quoting someone, you should have used quotation marks…and finished the quote. I could then point out how ridiculous it is to claim that men are not angels, so government is needed, so that men can rule other men-notice how men do not become angels at any point in the quote.