• 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!

Justices to Hear Case on Religious Objections to Same-Sex Marriage

cpwill said:
You don't worship Christianity, we worship Christ. The Christian is expected to honor God in all that he or she does; your workplace is no less holy than your church building, and you are expected to be equally Christian in it. That means honoring God with your profession.

In this case, it's not "telling a couple of gay kids to kick rocks", it's declining to take part in a ceremony marking a twisting, misrepresenting, and dishonoring of one of God's greatest gifts and sacraments (marriage).

There are lots of other instances. For example, a Christian doctor should be willing to treat any woman to help save her from injury, or her life, or disease.... but should not be forced to conduct or take part in conducting abortions. The doctor isn't "telling women to go kick rocks", the doctor is refusing to take part in abortion, and it happens to be a woman who is going to be the one doing the asking.
Click to expand...

Well, that makes more sense to me. However, in order for the argument to hold weight in my opinion, the baking of the cake would have to directly impact ones ability to worship. How is the person less free to worship Christ because they have a job where a customer comes in and buys a cake. I would view it as just business. Taking a different example, how can a Christian cashier sell condoms or alcohol to people? The cashier can refuse, and then be fired. Given that scenario, it may come a time, where everyone should just stop fighting each other. Christians should bake cakes for gays and gays shouldn't sue to hell and high water if they don't. If I was the gay couple, I would just go to a grocery store down the road.
 
cpwill said:
You don't worship Christianity, we worship Christ. The Christian is expected to honor God in all that he or she does; your workplace is no less holy than your church building, and you are expected to be equally Christian in it. That means honoring God with your profession.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you can cite a passage from scripture whee Christ refused to be associated with a sinner.

In this case, it's not "telling a couple of gay kids to kick rocks", it's declining to take part in a ceremony marking a twisting, misrepresenting, and dishonoring of one of God's greatest gifts and sacraments (marriage).
Click to expand...
That is bull crap. They are not taking part in anything, certainly no more than taking part in adultery or any other sin that they do not screen for, but hey Christian hypocrisy is different from regular hypocrisy, isn't it?
 
Winston said:
Well, that makes more sense to me. However, in order for the argument to hold weight in my opinion, the baking of the cake would have to directly impact ones ability to worship.
Click to expand...

Nope. It just has to violate one's conscience and religious beliefs.

How is the person less free to worship Christ because they have a job where a customer comes in and buys a cake.
Click to expand...

They aren't. They are less free if someone forces them to use their business to support activities that violate their faith.

Say, for example, that some kind of weird butterfly-effect change in history occurs, and you wake up tomorrow in a world where slavery is legal, but regulated. Someone walks in to your business and expects you to help him ship a dozen 10 year old girls up to the truck stop brothels to your north.

Do you help facilitate the rape of those children?

Or would you:

view it as just business.
Click to expand...


?

You seem like a fairly decent fellow - I am rather suspicious that, in this brave new world, you wouldn't help traffic in child sex slaves. Nor should you be forced to do so.

Taking a different example, how can a Christian cashier sell condoms or alcohol to people? The cashier can refuse, and then be fired.
Click to expand...

If a Christian doesn't want to sell condoms or alcohol, then they are free to get jobs that don't require them to do so, or own their own businesses, where they do not do so. A boss is also free to make selling alcohol or condoms as part of the job, and fire an employee who refuses to do so.

If I was the gay couple, I would just go to a grocery store down the road.
Click to expand...

That would have been the better solution.
 
prometeus said:
Perhaps you can cite a passage from scripture whee Christ refused to be associated with a sinner.
Click to expand...

No one is refusing to associate with sinners. People are refusing to use their professions to support or take part in ceremonies which dishonor God's will for marriage.

That is bull crap.
Click to expand...

:shrug: it is not. as demonstrated by the fact that the bakery in Colorado sold cakes to gay people all the time - including the couple that sued them. They just didn't want to support or take part in the wedding.

but hey Christian hypocrisy is different from regular hypocrisy, isn't it?
Click to expand...

No, Christian hypocrisy is worse, because we have greater help. We are, however, nonetheless all too human.
 
cpwill said:
Nope. It just has to violate one's conscience and religious beliefs.



They aren't. They are less free if someone forces them to use their business to support activities that violate their faith.

Say, for example, that some kind of weird butterfly-effect change in history occurs, and you wake up tomorrow in a world where slavery is legal, but regulated. Someone walks in to your business and expects you to help him ship a dozen 10 year old girls up to the truck stop brothels to your north.

Do you help facilitate the rape of those children?

Or would you:




?

You seem like a fairly decent fellow - I am rather suspicious that, in this brave new world, you wouldn't help traffic in child sex slaves. Nor should you be forced to do so.



If a Christian doesn't want to sell condoms or alcohol, then they are free to get jobs that don't require them to do so, or own their own businesses, where they do not do so. A boss is also free to make selling alcohol or condoms as part of the job, and fire an employee who refuses to do so.



That would have been the better solution.
Click to expand...

Not being at liberty of computer access to give you a point by point response, you come across as sensible and you've strengthened understanding between a Christian and a secularist here.

The question that comes to my mind is; should the baker have discretion to refuse business on whether or not the reason for the business passes a religious test? For example, if a baker wanted to refuse a cake to commemorate any sinful or immoral behavior, is that legal? I have no great urge to defend the gay couple because I think that's a fair question to ask.

And it gives me no great pleasure dragging homosexuality into the fray with questionable or seedy behavior.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
1. No one is refusing to serve anyone. People are refusing to serve gay weddings. This is an important point that opponents would do better to recognize and deal with honestly, as trying to pass over it only allows proponents of religious freedom to make that point and demonstrate a false presupposition.

2. If a devout Muslim or Jew doesn't wish to serve a woman, they are welcome to open up a business where men only serve men and women only serve women. The rest of us have no more right to trample on their faith with our beliefs in this scenario than we would to force a Muslim grocer to carry bacon and beer, or a Christian bookstore owner to carry porn.

3. The distinction between those who discriminate for religious reasons and those who do not is an important legal one. The government has to justify it's actions when limiting our freedoms, after all, and when it comes to the State limiting our religious freedoms, the standards the government has to meet are quite strict indeed:

First, the burden must be necessary for the "furtherance of a compelling government interest." Under strict scrutiny, a government interest is compelling when it is more than routine and does more than simply improve government efficiency. A compelling interest relates directly with core constitutional issues.

The second condition is that the rule must be the least restrictive way in which to further the government interest.​


So the government would have to argue that:

A) gay couples being able to access wedding cakes is a core constitutional issue for the state government, and

B) Only religious bakers who refuse to provide service are available, and there are no other accessible bakers for the gay couples to access, and therefore forcing a religious baker to make the cake is the least restrictive way of addressing that core constitutional issue​


it's not a matter of "it's not fair" or "but I think it's mean".
Click to expand...

As I see it, business owners are in business to make money. Turning away business, or turning away money should be their option.

If you chose to not do business with "segment x" of the population that's fine. Your loss is another's gain.

Just publicly post who you won't do business with to save everyone some time.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't celebrate birthdays. Why should they have to sell birthday anything to anyone?
They shouldn't have to.

Same with a Muslim man owning a business and not wanting to sell anything to women.

But why on earth should it ONLY be due to religious conflicts of interest????

Why can't a persons other moral conflicts that are not religious carry just as much weight????

I assume you're not suggesting that it's ONLY christian conflicts of interest that are important. Right?
 
Dragonfly said:
As I see it, business owners are in business to make money. Turning away business, or turning away money should be their option.

If you chose to not do business with "segment x" of the population that's fine. Your loss is another's gain.

Just publicly post who you won't do business with to save everyone some time.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't celebrate birthdays. Why should they have to sell birthday anything to anyone?
They shouldn't have to.

Same with a Muslim man owning a business and not wanting to sell anything to women.

But why on earth should it ONLY be due to religious conflicts of interest????

Why can't a persons other moral conflicts that are not religious carry just as much weight????

I assume you're not suggesting that it's ONLY christian conflicts of interest that are important. Right?
Click to expand...

I can understand and appreciate your position. I agree that generally we should maintain freedom of association in business, and everyone should be equally free to refuse to do business with everybody.

The reason that religious freedom carries more weight than simple preference is that, because it is one of our core rights (there is a reason it's in the very first Amendment in the Bill of Rights), it is more protected, because violating it is more serious.

Consider: I don't like the color bright orange. You pass a law requiring me to wear such a vest while driving. I grumble, and complain, but obey.
I don't like worshiping satan. You pass a law requiring me to do so. I will rebel and fight you to the death.


There is good reason for us to tread lightly on that which is core to individual's belief systems.
 
Winston said:
Not being at liberty of computer access to give you a point by point response, you come across as sensible and you've strengthened understanding between a Christian and a secularist here.
Click to expand...

:) Thanks

The question that comes to my mind is; should the baker have discretion to refuse business on whether or not the reason for the business passes a religious test? For example, if a baker wanted to refuse a cake to commemorate any sinful or immoral behavior, is that legal? I have no great urge to defend the gay couple because I think that's a fair question to ask.
Click to expand...

I think it should be. If the local Klan want a series of cakes with scenes of lynching black people, or with "God Hates Catholics" written across them, the Christian baker should be just as free to refuse.

I think you are creating an artificial division. Any partaking in sinful or immoral behavior is going to be problematic; not just behavior specifically tied to marriage. A Christian might equally have a problem celebrating or serving the celebration of (for example) abortion, or an orgy.


And it gives me no great pleasure dragging homosexuality into the fray with questionable or seedy behavior.
Click to expand...

The question is bigger than homosexuality - homosexuality is just the particular venue for this issue to come to the front, because it's the hot social ticket item.
 
TurtleDude said:
and that is where we differ. I don't believe the federal government has the proper power to tell a business who it has to deal with. I don't agree with discrimination but I also don't agree with the federal government usurping powers it never was properly given
Click to expand...

I have seen similar comments on this board and they also included race. Do you agree or disagree with that position. That a business should have the right to discriminate based upon race?
 
cpwill said:
No one is refusing to associate with sinners.
Click to expand...
Right, just passing judgement on them. So much more Christian no?

People are refusing to use their professions to support or take part in ceremonies which dishonor God's will for marriage.
Click to expand...
Bull crap. Baking a cake is as much support or taking part in a ceremony as lead mining has to do with bullets killing people. It is a false pretext, it is hypocrisy of people who profess religion and do not live up to the least of it.

it is not. as demonstrated by the fact that the bakery in Colorado sold cakes to gay people all the time - including the couple that sued them.
Click to expand...
Right, because supporting people ****ing each other in the ass is so much more Christian than knowing that they are getting married.

No, Christian hypocrisy is worse, because we have greater help. We are, however, nonetheless all too human.
Click to expand...
Clearly the help is not working because the only issue is gay weddings.
 
Dragonfly said:
But why on earth should it ONLY be due to religious conflicts of interest????
Click to expand...
Because clearly it is only the religious that that have consciences.

Why can't a persons other moral conflicts that are not religious carry just as much weight????
Click to expand...
If it is not religion based it is meaningless.

I assume you're not suggesting that it's ONLY christian conflicts of interest that are important. Right?
Click to expand...
Wrong.
 
cpwill said:
I can understand and appreciate your position. I agree that generally we should maintain freedom of association in business, and everyone should be equally free to refuse to do business with everybody.
Click to expand...
Right, because a civilized society can work with the whims of bigots being protected. I am curious what would you say if your house was burning and the firefighters would refuse to respond or act because of their religious conscience? How about emergency medical help?

The reason that religious freedom carries more weight than simple preference is that, because it is one of our core rights
Click to expand...
Self serving crap again. Now you pretend that now you deserve more protection because you believe in a certain way. Very Christian of you.

There is good reason for us to tread lightly on that which is core to individual's belief systems.
Click to expand...
Right because that core belief is valid only for Christians, well more like so called Christians.
 
prometeus said:
Right, just passing judgement on them.
Click to expand...

Nope. Just refusing to take part in celebrating gay weddings.

So much more Christian no?
Click to expand...

Showing honor and loyalty to God, even when it brings you prosecution and hatred? Yeah, I'd say it's a fairly solid "Christian" move.

Bull crap. Baking a cake is as much support or taking part in a ceremony as lead mining has to do with bullets killing people.
Click to expand...

You may think so. We disagree. Other examples include wedding photographers, planners, etc., though I doubt you'd extend tolerance to them, either.

It is a false pretext,
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. You don't let people destroy your livelihood for the lol's.


it is hypocrisy of people who profess religion and do not live up to the least of it.
Click to expand...


Actually in this case they are doing so fairly well.




But you keep right on acting how you're acting. You'll get more Trump.



Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
cpwill said:
I think it should be. If the local Klan want a series of cakes with scenes of lynching black people, or with "God Hates Catholics" written across them, the Christian baker should be just as free to refuse.
Click to expand...
Yes they should be but the bakers in question were not asked to write anything and there IS a difference.
 
prometeus said:
Yes they should be but the bakers in question were not asked to write anything and there IS a difference.
Click to expand...
No, the only difference is whether or not you approve of the message being celebrated. Their legal rights remain the same.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
cpwill said:
Nope. Just refusing to take part in celebrating gay weddings.
Click to expand...
Was the baker asked to the wedding?

Showing honor and loyalty to God, even when it brings you prosecution and hatred?
Click to expand...
By showing hatred. Well said.

That is incorrect. You don't let people destroy your livelihood for the lol's.
Click to expand...
It is self destruction if any.

Actually in this case they are doing so fairly well.
Click to expand...
Only to the apologists of bigotry, then again the final arbitration will be the real test.

But you keep right on acting how you're acting. You'll get more Trump.
Click to expand...
You seem to be under the delusion that politics has some form of permanency.
 
cpwill said:
No, the only difference is whether or not you approve of the message being celebrated. Their legal rights remain the same.
Click to expand...
Their rights yes, but in a civilized society it does not include discrimination.
 
JANFU said:
I have seen similar comments on this board and they also included race. Do you agree or disagree with that position. That a business should have the right to discriminate based upon race?
Click to expand...

yep, I think a business should have the right to refuse to serve anyone for any reason. Now that doesn't mean I think they should do that. I just don't think the federal government properly can say otherwise
 
If baking a cake is against your religion, becoming a baker may be a bad career choice.
 
TurtleDude said:
yep, I think a business should have the right to refuse to serve anyone for any reason. Now that doesn't mean I think they should do that. I just don't think the federal government properly can say otherwise
Click to expand...

Honest answer. Thank you
 
prometeus said:
Their rights yes, but in a civilized society it does not include discrimination.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, in a civilized society, we follow the Constitution, and one's religious liberties trump another's desire to feel that everything is fair.
 
rocket88 said:
If baking a cake is against your religion, becoming a baker may be a bad career choice.
Click to expand...

Oh, hey, look!



strawman.jpg






A Strawman!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom