• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Indiana's Pence to sign bill allowing businesses to reject gay customers

Actually, I was pondering how it might apply to yourself.

well like i already said what shows more humility than accepting facts, supporting equal rights for others whether i agree with them or not and not pushing what i personally might find important on others.
 
I don't understand why a god would allow humans to be sexually attracted to the same sex, and then put forth that it is wrong to act on it, well, supposed god, as a Bisexual male, who has engaged in "homosexual sex" smite me. And yeah winston, "logicman" might need a name change.

Of course you don't. You don't understand the religions you reject out of hand. Simply put so even a humanist might understand it, God also gave us anger and we are counseled against it. The struggle with our temptations makes us stronger. Take a look at how Buddhism views desire.
 
All of the pious hypocrite bigots should be asking themselves one question: WWJD?

WWJD? If you don't know the answer....perhaps you need to read about the man.

This. A thousand times, this.

I think anyone who lives in America, where the dominant religion is Christianity, need to know what's in the Bible. Really, people, go read it sometime. Some of you might have your minds blown by what's actually in there.

I get it! At the Sermon on the Mount Jesus made certain that porkers and fatasses didn't get any bread and made damned sure they didn't go back for seconds. That would have been enabling them to commit one of the 7 Deadly Sins, no? Why doesn't anyone ever mention that?

I'm confused. According to you Christians in Indiana need a religious freedom law for the purpose of only practicing the parts of their religion they like. Christians in Indiana are not denying greedy people the right to purchase more crap they don't need, right? How about McMansions? Do Christian real estate agents refuse to sell people houses that people really don't need? You are telling me Indiana Christians support selling boats and vacation homes and diamond jewelry to people. Doesn't that directly contribute to the practice of envy? They don't have problems doing business and/or associating with prideful people either, huh? When fat people come rolling into a Christian owned restaurant in Indiana their business will not be refused...unless they are gay fat people.

What do you want to bet that almost all the churches that support Indiana's religious freedom law so that they can deny doing business with gay people in the Lord's name have vending machines full of sugary drinks and sugar laden snacks? Promoting and enabling gluttony for Jesus? That's OK. Right?

So we really aren't talking about the protection of a religion are we? We aren't even talking about most Christians. We are talking about a law that allows a small number of people practice pure hatred in the name of Christianity. I'd imagine most good Christians in Indiana feel raped.

See, now the cool kids are showing up in this thread. The ones who have their heads screwed on straight.

Not a non-response at all. Your dodge is noted. You post was simply playing the "Religious martyr" card. WWJD? Do you think that he would turn away the gay person or turn him away and then claim he was a martyr due to the backlash? If you don't know the answer, read about the man.

 
well like i already said what shows more humility than accepting facts, supporting equal rights for others whether i agree with them or not and not pushing what i personally might find important on others.

I was specifically referring to your posts and their tone in response to other members here.
I wasn't detecting any humility (I may be wrong), but I thought I was detecting boastfulness (and I may be wrong about that too).
 
Of course you don't. You don't understand the religions you reject out of hand. Simply put so even a humanist might understand it, God also gave us anger and we are counseled against it. The struggle with our temptations makes us stronger. Take a look at how Buddhism views desire.

You assume I adhere to your supposed god out of thousands, no thanks.
 
You assume I adhere to your supposed god out of thousands, no thanks.

Try reading for comprehension, I presume the opposite and have made that clear. Heck, you've made that clear.
 
I was specifically referring to your posts and their tone in response to other members here.
I wasn't detecting any humility (I may be wrong), but I thought I was detecting boastfulness (and I may be wrong about that too).

hmmm interesting, well you are welcome to your opinion that accepting and understanding facts is boastful but id say that subjective opinion doesnt seem to fit the definition

boastful
1: a statement in which you express too much pride in yourself or in something you have, have done, or are connected to in some way
2: a reason to be proud : something impressive that someone or something has or has done

reading 1, doenst work because theres nothing "i" have done than posted facts . . .
reading 2, again the same thing, knowing facts isnt impressive, its common

but for the record i see no problem with being boastful, not does it impact my religion.
I am proud to be a reality based and fact based poster :shrug:

and the best part of that is none of that changes the fact of my original post of the facts presented here

is there some point you had? is your subjective opinion of such, which you are more than welcome to have relevant in any way to the topic or does it impact it in anyway?
 
He would say, "Go, and sin no more"

If they wanted something to facilitate sin, I believe He would indeed turn them away. If they came in repentance, He would accept them

Romans 1: 26-27

Yes. All the words of the Bible are the words of Jesus

Oh you want to include Biblical arguments?!

Show me the exact chapter and verse where Jesus said that gay sex is a sin. Not Saint Paul. Not the Old Testament. Jesus.

While you're looking for it, why don't you start by reading Matthew 7:1-5. And you want to pull an enormous act of irony and use that to judge me, then congratulations, you are the kind of person who needed to hear it.

Next, flip over to Exodus 20:16. Read that verse. Again, and again and again and again. Notice that intent does not show up. Nor does failure to do your homework. Or to remove your own prejudices and biases. You give false testimony against your neighbor, you break the Ninth Commandment. Period.

Then turn to Revelation 21:8 and read what fate awaits those of you who continue to lie.

If all of the above verses are true and right, then you have far, far bigger problems to deal with than just some unwanted backlash to a law of men.
 
If you are straight and cisgender, then you have the privilege of making comments such as these. You are completely dismissing the legitimate concerns of LGBTs, who have to deal with homophobia and genderphobia every day of their lives. As such, your holier-than-thou attitude does not deserve to be listened to. It only deserves to be stood up.

Your attitude is classic of those who are either homosexual, transsexual, or of ANY group who think that they are the only ones who have the right to speak on their issues and the only ones who understand it. The holier-than-thou attitude is yours and is pretty worthless. When you learn to start listening, perhaps then you'll learn something. As for me, I've done more for the gay and trans community than you could do in two lifetimes.
 
10408583_1077378868942560_7099297790393415500_n.jpg
 
I'm confused. According to you Christians in Indiana need a religious freedom law for the purpose of only practicing the parts of their religion they like. Christians in Indiana are not denying greedy people the right to purchase more crap they don't need, right? How about McMansions? Do Christian real estate agents refuse to sell people houses that people really don't need? You are telling me Indiana Christians support selling boats and vacation homes and diamond jewelry to people

Boats, vacation homes, and jewelry are not inherently contrary to Gods will, and may perfectly well be in alignment with it. And yes, there are Christian real estate agents who attempt to perform their work in accordance with Biblical principles about money.

Doesn't that directly contribute to the practice of envy?

No more than having a wife or a donkey does. Envy is the sin of the envious, not the envied.

They don't have problems doing business and/or associating with prideful people either, huh? When fat people come rolling into a Christian owned restaurant in Indiana their business will not be refused...unless they are gay fat people.

....no. Fat people should not be gluttons, which is not the same as being fat.

What do you want to bet that almost all the churches that support Indiana's religious freedom law so that they can deny doing business with gay people in the Lord's name have vending machines full of sugary drinks and sugar laden snacks? Promoting and enabling gluttony for Jesus? That's OK. Right?

:shrug: those items are also not inherently gluttonous, any more than a birthday cake is.

So we really aren't talking about the protection of a religion are we? We aren't even talking about most Christians. We are talking about a law that allows a small number of people practice pure hatred in the name of Christianity. I'd imagine most good Christians in Indiana feel raped.

I appreciate you said that, because it demonstrates thoroughly that you have no idea what you are talking about :) But it is unfortunate that you lack the intellectual capacity or willingness to realize that people might disagree with you for perfectly fine reasons :(.
 
and would he refuse to serve the person?
You know the answer to that question. He wouldnt have HAD to serve that person. He told the prostitute go forth...and sin no more. He did NOT say go forth, and others should continue to pay for sex with you. Presumably, the prostitute was humbled by the love expressed to her and became converted. Therefore there would BE no service.

Since you keep wanting to try to use Jesus and fit his example into your argument, you HAVE to actually take the whole thing into account. No...the baker would NOT have sold the cake for the gay wedding because there would have been no gay wedding. Jesus NEVER stated, accept and embrace sinful behavior.
 
What? More drama and histrionics from drama queens of politics? No! Say it isn't so! :lamo

Mornin EB. :2wave: Yeah the MS media and the left has played this out to deceive and lie about the law. Naturally the Democrats are making more out of it than whats there.

Already trying to shut down the discussion while talking about ifs, ands, or buts. Some maybe's.....Well this COULD happen. This might happen.

Here is the answer they should have been given.


If a frog had wings.....it wouldn't hit its ass everytime it hops.
 
That's all well and good, but others are not held to your grandmother's understanding of her religion. The Indiana law protects the freedoms and rights of those who disagree with her

My point from the beginning is that it really isn't the religion that demands people turn away certain business or act a certain way towards certain people or types of people, it is instead people's personal beliefs. God doesn't demand the Bible that people "shall not sell items to gays" or that they "shall not support same sex marriages". This is inferred by people. It is their interpretation of what God wants. It is a personal belief, not really a religious mandate. I just think people should accept responsibility for that rather than making excuses like "my religion demands". No, it doesn't.
 
If history is a teacher, he would say "Hey!!! Dont hate on the gay guy!!!" and then he would turn to the gay guy and say "go forth...and sin no more..."

You don't actually know that he would tell the gay guy "go forth...and sin no more...", or even if he did, what exact sin he was referring to. People simply assume, via their own personal (even if shared by others) interpretation of scriptures that Jesus did not approve of homosexuality, that God does not approve of homosexuality. It is even believed that Jesus helped a gay Roman soldier and said absolutely nothing about his being gay, in fact saying he was likely going to heaven.
 
My mother is Catholic as well, as was my grandmother. Guess who taught me that there was nothing wrong with homosexuality and that they should be allowed to marry? My mother and grandmother. My grandmother is the most devout to her faith that I have seen, having said prayers 4 hours a day, 7 days a week for as long as I knew her. (You didn't interrupt my grandmother's prayers.) Just because people have "literature" claiming something is a sin or say "my religion says" doesn't mean it isn't still their personal beliefs that lead them to do something like refusing to sell a cake for a same sex wedding.

CINOs
 
It's just a fact that libertarians score higher on IQ tests than liberals. Why are you so defensive over this? Did you really think an ideology that is more emotional than rational could honestly outscore an ideology that is more rational than emotional?

LOL....the one being "defensive" is you....because the facts don't back up your claims. Sorry Charlie. Carry on.
 
Back
Top Bottom