Government to Ordained Ministers: Celebrate Same-Sex Wedding or Go to Jail

a reply to: Dfairlite

The chapel is selling wedding services. All they need to do is make their wedding services exclusive to a man and a woman and presto, now they're selling a product that doesn't fit gays. sure, they can go through the chapel, but they will be called man and wife, they will have a man and woman on top of their cake and they will say you can now kiss the bride. And they can make it even more prominent if they like.

No. The wedding chapel can't say, We sell weddings, but not to you. If they sell weddings to the public then, by law, they must sell weddings to all of the public, non-discriminately.

What they can do is hire someone whose not offended by gay marriage to perform the ceremony for them, or, offer a wedding package minus the minister.

originally posted by: SomePeople
I'm just wondering - would these 'ministers' marry a couple who are both gay, but are male and female?

Well, here's another concern for these folks if they're truly following Bible-based beliefs in light of their customers:

1. Have either of them been divorced?
2. Have either of them eaten any shrimp, crabs or crawdads lately?
3. Have either of them ever had sex with anyone else outside of marriage?
4. Have they ever been drunk? Told a fib? Wanted something someone else had?
5. Have either of them ever planted more than one kind of plant in their yards?

Because, see the Bible forbids ALL THESE THINGS ... but doesn't forbid same sex marriage.

I'm concerned for them ... maybe their beliefs just make them incompatible with the marriage business.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Before you flame on with knee jerk reactions and then expect reasoning and understanding.

The IRA were diametrically opposed by the both government and the citizens of the UK. Politically, ethically, and otherwise.

YET a deal was found and peaceful coexistence was achieved. There is no better example comparing Gays in the US and the bible belt that opposes them. It may even be too good an example. The IRA, well the Irish that wanted independence were more in a tough spot than any obtuse liberal homosexual in the US dealing with hicks or the bible belt. They knew real struggle. Not getting a gay wedding cake or a wedding at sh*itty cheapo wedding chapels doesn't even compare to abject slavery.

While you deal in spite and issues like the principle of things or feeling slighted, they were Fing slaughtered for centuries...YET they managed to get their heads out of their asses and work towards peace. They wanted a country of their own in its entirety without a missing county that doesnt even want to be part of Ireland. They got that as much as they are going to get it. Life went on, GASP. If they had been obtuse like American gays then they would have still been dealing with a terrible situation based on their spite and arrogance trying to convince the UK that not only do they deserve their country but reparations, an apology and every other absurd demand that jeopardized true peace.

We are tired of gay culture hijacking every damned election and issue like the world revolves aorund them because they dontfeel accepted enough or to their standard. Boo Hoo. Life isnt great.

Excuse me if the fact that your legal victory and status as recognized and protected citizens like everyone else isnt enough for you and that you think you deserve so much more for being gay. I dont give a damn. You sure as hell are never going to get the vindication you want where humbling the bible belt and religious people is done by you like the very evil you say you overcame.

Excuse me for not being gay and seeing it like a far left liberal where the world is offered just because otherwise you might get offended. There is still a whole host of issues other peoples are dealing with in the US that demand our attention. You seem to be fine enough now where you can manage. Not enough? I dont care. There really are more pressing issues than if you can make an ordained minister in a religion to humble himself and change centuries of thinking RIGHT NOW. Poverty, out of control government, near national bankruptcy and otherwise...but hey you NEED gay christian wedding cakes and for scum bag prostitute wedding chapels to marry you just in case you want to turn it down for being tacky.

Go ahead and ignore the plethora of other examples and every single thing I said and my message to you because you want to be outright correct and vindicated as a gay man how you think you deserve to be for being so awesome...... in a predominantly Christian and religiously zealous country. Dont take a second to smell the roses and realize that you have won a huge victory already and the half way point was met with you as much as these people are capable of for the times we live in. BUT NOOOO!

Thats not enough.

EDIT TO ADD:
I am not a queen bee, no. I am not important like that. I guarantee you that I am a diligent and busy worker bee though. You dont bother with a single bee and its sting, though an elephant can be made to charge because of just one. You worry about the hive it stirs.

originally posted by: Dfairlite

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Dfairlite

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Dfairlite

The government is not enforcing tolerance, that would be a fool's game, as this thread makes obvious.

The government is enforcing the laws of Idaho regarding discrimination and marriage and public accomdation.

LOL, really? they're not enforcing tolerance, they're enforcing the laws!? The laws mandating tolerance. Oh darn... but good try. TBH, I think you may be losing your mind.

Perhaps you'll favor the insane then with a quote from a law in Idaho that mentions "mandated tolerance."

Marriage is legal for different sexed and same sexed couples now, in Idaho.

Hitching Post is a business which provides marriages to the public.

Idaho has a law forbidding discrimination against homosexual citizens.

That's the law being enforced.

Weddings are a product being sold, for a profit. The marriage license issued by the state is all one needs to be married. You don't have to go to a chapel. The chapel isn't denying them the opportunity to be married.

The chapel is just denying blacks in their establishment. That's perfectly fine - oh, what a minute...it isn't. It's not fine at all.

Hang your bloody head in shame for thinking that it is.

Apparently the couple is trying to change their business to a religious corporation, let's see if they are able and willing to change their business model to fit that. Somehow I doubt they'll be willing to meet the requirement, switching to a non-profit. I have a feeling that they will win their lawsuit, Christians tend to trump law case after case in this country.

a reply to: Kali74

I have a feeling that they will win their lawsuit, Christians tend to trump law case after case in this country.

I fear you are right, and they will use the "Hobby Lobby defense". Just as Ginsburg warned, it was a sweeping ruling that will ultimately allow Christians to discriminate. This is why the (unconstitutional) Religious Freedom and Restoration Act should be repealed!

a reply to: windword

What exactly is your biggest "Fear" about Christians?

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: beezzer

Not often I agree with you, but Im sick at how governments are telling us what opinions we are allowed to have and what we can or can not agree with.

I also agree, even though I'm gay.

Rebel 5

a reply to: tadaman

So you did make the comparison I stated and I didn't put words in your mouth?

Good to know.

As far as the rest, you're the one with the flamethrower, or are you too far gone into righteous indignation to notice.

I "deal in spite" because I favor the laws of Idaho being enforced???

The only one I see with their head up their rear is you and your ilk. You're losing your mind about ONE CASE that is so clear cut in terms of the law as to be adjudicated by a fifth grader. Are you smarter than a fifth-grader?

And yet, we, "the gays" should just be careful not to get too uppity, or you and the redneck brigade is going to bring all hell down on us? Bring it on, because I can read between the lines of what you're saying and it is the purest hypocritical nonsense. You're just letting your bigot flag fly freely, and good for you! It must have been uncomfortable wherever you were keeping it stuffed!

"We" shouldn't ask for too much equality, "we" shouldn't expect to be treated too fairly before the law, because, well, you and what you apparently perceive as a majority of Americans are just about tired of us acting like we're real people, that we have the same rights as you.

I think you're dead wrong. I think the majority of Americans are more tired of you and the brand of rampant stupidity you're offering as fair trade.

I've never asked for anything "for being gay," bud. I don't need to, I get what have and take care of what I have on my own.

But the fact of this matter is that NO ONE has asked for anything BECAUSE they are gay, EQUAL RIGHTS ARE DUE us because WE ARE AMERICAN CITIZENS JUST LIKE YOU.

However, in this ONE CASE that has for some reason pulled your panties up to your ears and cut off circulation to your brain, your two Christians ARE ASKING FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT.

They want to be recognized and elevated above the law, above the rest of the citizens of Idaho, because they are SPECIAL AND UNIQUE.

And, since apparently you have appointed me the spokesman for all gays everywhere, let me assure you, based on the character you've displayed here ... no one wants YOU to be GAY.

We have enough problems.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Like I mentioned this is illgal. The laws arent being enforced. You are trying to make religiously ordained ministers to perform a wedding they could lose their licence to perform weddings over. You dont even know the laws, since you think that their being a business makes them somehow have to serve you like a freaking little prince. Their tax exempt status doesn't change the fact that you are asking non civil servants to perform a legal union through a ceremony of religious observance or one with no religious observance which they may not want to do..

Yes, the very sprint of fairness and democracy and the law. You know what its like to have to deal with others imposing on you as a minority. Not like once you are given half a chance you dont turn into a little nazi running around demanding people to do things they are opposed to.

Also you know damned well I wasnt calling you a terrorist but comparing the struggle of american gays to the one of the Irish and their own struggle for independence(though it was too good of an exmaple since you only bitch for being slighted, they died for being slaves). Either you did get that and are such a fake poser to deny that and run with it for the sake of bickering like an angry dolphin or you are too retarded to get that. You get offended and your brain shuts down.

originally posted by: AuranVector

originally posted by: beezzer
Linky

For years, those in favor of same-sex marriage have argued that all Americans should be free to live as they choose. And yet in countless cases, the government has coerced those who simply wish to be free to live in accordance with their belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.


Ministers face a 180-day jail term and $1,000 fine for each day they decline to celebrate the same-sex wedding.

Just this weekend, a case has arisen in Idaho, where city officials have told ordained ministers they have to celebrate same-sex weddings or face fines and jail time.

Most who have read my posts know that I have no issue with gay marriage. But this is what many have warned about.

This is the PC over-reach, telling faith-based organizations what to believe and how to act.

I look forward to seeing everyone condemn the acts of government in this and support the ministers, regardless of their faith.

As always, read, reply, ignore or eat raw meat on the subway. It is always up to you.

If this is real, this is just WRONG. Personally, I have nothing against Gays or same-sex marriage, but forcing people to do things against their religious beliefs is wrong. This is a violation of freedom of religion.

Fair-minded Gays should be outrage by this too. You may not agree with their religious beliefs, but they have a right to believe what they want. They also have a right to pursue their chosen professions (whether it's running a marriage chapel or a bakery) according to those religious beliefs.

That Gay couple can easily find someone else to marry them.

Here's the heart of this issue. Lets say that there is only one grocery store in a town that is 100 miles from its nearest neighbor. Now lets assume that the owner is a fundamentalist Christian. Should said store owner be allowed to refuse to sell groceries to gays, Muslims, atheists, etc.? Should the local gas station owner be allowed to do the same? What about the ER doctor? If you are a business open to the public, then you serve the public, even if you don't agree with their beliefs or the way they live their life. You are in business to make money, and if you can't do that, then close up shop and do something else. Simple really.

originally posted by: SomePeople
For anyone who is still having trouble with this issue - these two 'ministers' want to buy groceries. They attempt to buy from the local store and are denied because of their status as religious nutters. This isn't legal and it's also ethically dubious.

That right there is the crux of this whole kerfuffle.

People who don't understand that that's the crux of the issue are willfully ignorant and will remain that way. It's been explained to them repeatedly and they choose to not get it.

originally posted by: rebelv

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: beezzer

Not often I agree with you, but Im sick at how governments are telling us what opinions we are allowed to have and what we can or can not agree with.

I also agree, even though I'm gay.

Rebel 5

What opinion has the government forced you to hold? Be precise. I've placed a bet with someone that you can't name any opinion that the government has forced you to hold.

a reply to: tadaman

No, it's not "illgal" ... Where does their ordination come from again? What church, what group, what internet-send-in-your-check-and-we'll-send-you-a-license is going to punish them for obeying the laws of Idaho, eh?

Name it. Provide evidence. Or are you just espousing your wisdom that has no basis in reality again?

I'm not trying to get married and I assure you if I were this sleaze-bag little outfit would not be on the list. So what are you on about?

They offer marriage ceremonies to the public and they are refusing to serve a member of the public on an illegal basis. I did not make the laws in Idaho! Why do you want to ignore the will of the People of Idaho for a couple of jack-leg opportunists?

You want to make this personal? Oh, how I wish I could and not violate T&C, you have no idea.

I will note that I really do not like being compared with the Nazis or IRA terrorists (and yes you admitted that you compared me and/or us with the IRA); so if you would stop that I'd be very grateful, okay? That sounds a lot like a baseless personal attack.

What tax exempt status are you talking about??? When did I mention tax exempt status in regard to the Knappies? They are a for-profit business as far as I know, as far as any article I've read states. Do you have other information? Bring it.

Idaho passed a law about discrimination. Idaho has marriage equality now. Take it up with Idaho.

And for goodness sakes put a cold cloth on your face ... you're gonna bust a vein.

originally posted by: Tangerine

What opinion has the government forced you to hold? Be precise. I've placed a bet with someone that you can't name any opinion that the government has forced you to hold.

That I have to purchase health insurance.

Sorry, off topic, but I had to chime in.

a reply to: Gryphon66

If you are too lazy to read the thread dont ask me to repeat myself. ORDINATION isnt a state function. The very terminology if you bothered to read a single definition is a religious context for authority derived from a number of different faiths.

Its not that I want to make this personal, its that unreasonable men dont get to be unreasonable and also have courtesy extended in a win win situation for them.

If you started to even respect the other side you would put yourself in the shoes of the side opposed to you. Not doing that is in its own right ignorant.

TRY to see things for a split second beyond your own point of view and allow actual civil and rational dialogue to go on. If not I will not see you as being someone I can learn from, someone I can convey my thoughts to or even someone I can have a productive exchange with even if we ultimately disagree.

I wasnt even talking to you, yet you stood up to be counted in the most negative way possible.

All this BS could have been averted had you TALKED to me instead of TALKING AT ME.

If you want reason and respect, show it. I tried and am not going to play into the arguments of people who insult my intelligence and have no regard for the courtesy of others they DEMAND.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: tavi45

Correct.
This isn't about gay rights, it is about government overreaching and going outside of the boundaries of our Constitution.

Odd, I thought our gov't had the obligation to ensure all liberties were equal, that the minority enjoy the same endowed rights as the majority but I guess I was wrong? Only the straight Caucasians have liberty.

Duly noted.

Derek

a reply to: tadaman

Let me be clear: I have not had and I really have no need for anything further from you. Feel free to stop responding TO ME at any time you're comfortable with it. EDIT: I have absolutely no interest in any of the other interpersonal garbage you're trying to pile on now. I don't want to teach you anything, I haven't tried to, and I give a $^%@ what wallow of bigoted ignorance you wish to bask in.

How pathetic it is that you're trying to portray innocence; I would have to say you're not reading what you're writing.

Here's the question though: are YOU still reading what I'm writing since you insist on responding?

I didn't say anything about ordination being a state function.

I asked you what church, or religious body, or internet marketplace they're ordained under.

Can you answer that question?

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Gryphon66

If you are too lazy to read the thread dont ask me to repeat myself. ORDINATION isnt a state function. The very terminology if you bothered to read a single definition is a religious context for authority derived form a number of different faiths.

I agree! A state function would actually have some tangibility to it. Ordination however, is so easy, even you can do it! RIGHT NOW!!!

a reply to: Gryphon66

SEVERAL. SEVERAL faiths. You can be certified in Jewish ceremonies, Christian and any other you want in these cheapo tacky chapels no real gay man would be caught dead in. You offer weddings to Jews, you do the Rabbi thing. You get Catholics, you do the Catholic thing. You offer several religious services. No matter how trivial you think that is, it is still a religious ceremony.

What gets me is that there are plenty of these cheapo whore chapels that wed people by just civil union. TARGETING the ones that dont is done to set a precedent and everyone knows that no matter the subterfuge used to hide the fact...