Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So say a gay couple goes to a business that denies them service, citing this law and their conservative Christian ideology.

That would be ok.

But the same Christian can go to a business owned by the same exact gay couple, and they must provide s/he with service? The gay couple cannot deny the Christian service, citing his/her offensive religious beliefs?

What the hell?

Look it up on YouTube - a guy calls up gay bakeries and asks for a cake. He says there's an event supporting traditional marriage between a man and a woman and he needs a cake for it. Watch the profanity and backlash.

It was fake, a staged video. Bakeries don't go around advertising themselves as "gay" or "non-gay"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all of you trying to restrict this law to providing flowers for and catering gay weddings and trying to convince yourself that is no big deal, you're missing the point. The implications of this law go way beyond that, and it's discrimination, pure and simple.

No it's not about discrimination. These people need a way to protect themselves, look at how the pizza owners' lives and livelihoods are threatened. They are fine with serving gay customers in the restaurant, but when they express reluctance to cater for a gay wedding they have to go into hiding.

Insanity reigns. People here seem to be fine with death threats and other threats levied at these pizza parlor owners, all the while screaming about unfairness. Kind of hilarious in a sick way. They don't even see it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So say a gay couple goes to a business that denies them service, citing this law and their conservative Christian ideology.

That would be ok.

But the same Christian can go to a business owned by the same exact gay couple, and they must provide s/he with service? The gay couple cannot deny the Christian service, citing his/her offensive religious beliefs?

What the hell?

Look it up on YouTube - a guy calls up gay bakeries and asks for a cake. He says there's an event supporting traditional marriage between a man and a woman and he needs a cake for it. Watch the profanity and backlash.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For all of you trying to restrict this law to providing flowers for and catering gay weddings and trying to convince yourself that is no big deal, you're missing the point. The implications of this law go way beyond that, and it's discrimination, pure and simple.

No it's not about discrimination. These people need a way to protect themselves, look at how the pizza owners' lives and livelihoods are threatened. They are fine with serving gay customers in the restaurant, but when they express reluctance to cater for a gay wedding they have to go into hiding.

Anonymous wrote:What makes denying a gay couple a cake a legitimate religious issue?

Where exactly in the Bible does it say thou shalt turn away people whom you do not agree with?

More specifically, where did Jesus teach anything even remotely like this?

I can't seem to find it anywhere. Certainly not in the Gospels which are the first hand testimony of Christ's teachings. Anyone? Anyone? Citation, please?

If you can't come up with one then it's not really a bonafide religious issue. So please stop trying to wrap your homophobic bigotry up in religion thinking it can act as a shield. If even Jesus isn't backing you up on this then you are full of crap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are NOT judging gays.
They cannot, in good conscience, cater a gay wedding. According to their religious beliefs.
Remember, they have stated they welcome gays into their restaurant and would serve them. It is not about being gay.
It is about the religious aspect of the ceremony.

But they're not religious beliefs- they are using religion to justify hateful, homophobic beliefs.

Should the same people turn down an event by KKK?

I don't think criminal organizations are considered a protected class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't get the defense I'm seeing: "I'm not a bigot! I have no problem with gays! I just don't like gay marriage!" Why do people think that that isn't discriminatory? "I'm not prejudiced! I think you're mostly people!" How is that any different than "I have no problem with Jews! I just don't think they should be allowed to marry outside their religion!"

I agree. I think people who oppose gay marriage fail to grasp the basic rights long-term gay couples cannot enjoy- adoption, medical decision making, joint filing of taxes, and shared wealth. Its as though legal gay marriage will suddenly create millions of homosexuals when in reality, it just recognizes the reality that millions of gay people are in committed, long-term relationships (often with children) without equal legal protection.

You are incorrect about all these points. Simple legal documents fix these issues. I am heterosexual and married, yet was able to act as the medical decision maker for acfroend having surgery. I signed a form and so did he prior. My mother was in a car accident and the hospital at first refused information to my father due to HIPPA - 50 year marriage.

The ONLY one of those listed that can be fixed by a "simple legal document" is medical power of attorney. And often you have to jump through some serious bureaucracy before you are recognized, which is not much help if you just got pulled out of a wreck.

I literally signed a paper. So did he. No hoops

It's easy to sign. Harder to use.

Anonymous wrote:So say a gay couple goes to a business that denies them service, citing this law and their conservative Christian ideology.

That would be ok.

But the same Christian can go to a business owned by the same exact gay couple, and they must provide s/he with service? The gay couple cannot deny the Christian service, citing his/her offensive religious beliefs?

What the hell?

Anonymous wrote:For all of you trying to restrict this law to providing flowers for and catering gay weddings and trying to convince yourself that is no big deal, you're missing the point. The implications of this law go way beyond that, and it's discrimination, pure and simple.

Anonymous wrote:Alright, so this bakery was against providing a product that would be used at the reception to celebrate something that was against the bakery owner's Christian beliefs. I don't really understand that, but I can sort of see why the owner might feel reluctant to do so. Maybe. Did the bakery also refuse to provide cakes for weddings of other non-Christian couples, or for events celebrating the milestones of other religions, or for atheists? If so, it seems like a principled religious stance that I dislike and find objectionable but can respect. Otherwise, it seems like arbitrary anti-gay discrimination to me, and that is not something I can support. I have serious problems with this law due to how it seems like it could be used.

Do to others what you want them to do to you. This is the meaning of the law of Moses and the teaching of the prophets.

Do to others what you would want them to do to you.

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself

Anonymous wrote:Alright, so this bakery was against providing a product that would be used at the reception to celebrate something that was against the bakery owner's Christian beliefs. I don't really understand that, but I can sort of see why the owner might feel reluctant to do so. Maybe. Did the bakery also refuse to provide cakes for weddings of other non-Christian couples, or for events celebrating the milestones of other religions, or for atheists? If so, it seems like a principled religious stance that I dislike and find objectionable but can respect. Otherwise, it seems like arbitrary anti-gay discrimination to me, and that is not something I can support. I have serious problems with this law due to how it seems like it could be used.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't get the defense I'm seeing: "I'm not a bigot! I have no problem with gays! I just don't like gay marriage!" Why do people think that that isn't discriminatory? "I'm not prejudiced! I think you're mostly people!" How is that any different than "I have no problem with Jews! I just don't think they should be allowed to marry outside their religion!"

I agree. I think people who oppose gay marriage fail to grasp the basic rights long-term gay couples cannot enjoy- adoption, medical decision making, joint filing of taxes, and shared wealth. Its as though legal gay marriage will suddenly create millions of homosexuals when in reality, it just recognizes the reality that millions of gay people are in committed, long-term relationships (often with children) without equal legal protection.

You are incorrect about all these points. Simple legal documents fix these issues. I am heterosexual and married, yet was able to act as the medical decision maker for acfroend having surgery. I signed a form and so did he prior. My mother was in a car accident and the hospital at first refused information to my father due to HIPPA - 50 year marriage.

The ONLY one of those listed that can be fixed by a "simple legal document" is medical power of attorney. And often you have to jump through some serious bureaucracy before you are recognized, which is not much help if you just got pulled out of a wreck.

I literally signed a paper. So did he. No hoops