It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Cake Baking Gay Haters and Gay Mating Cake Tasters find Common Ground

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 03:15 AM
You know, as I think of it, this gesture becomes more and more of an exemplar of true Christian charity!

I mean,just think about it. The gay community is STILL trying to help these folks out, even while we get scapegoated, millions of us all across the country, for the fact that the Kleins threw away their business in their fit of stubborn criminality and hateful prejudice.

I think that fulfils the requirement to "turn the other cheek" very precisely.

How sad that these scofflaws chose their own pride and a desire to be treated as if they are above the law over participating in the business they had worked so hard for!

How sad that they chose not to obey the Lord's injunction in the Bible at 1 Peter 2: 13-14

13Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

That's the real shame, to me. I guess pride does go before a fall.

edit on 3Thu, 23 Oct 2014 03:16:39 -050014p0320141066 by Gryphon66 because: Numbers.

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 05:19 AM

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: Pinke
I have always said that what this fellow is doing is a good thing. (If you care about these things, they're almost at $3100.) Fine, I say yet again, give them money. Giving them money is a good and positive thing. OK, are we back together? I'm glad Gays are helping other people.

I bolded what I picked up from your post:

originally posted by: charles1952
There is nothing said on the fund raising page about helping the Kleins. This is more of the message:

There's nothing wrong with that of course, and I'm sure that the Klein's will be able to use the money. But don't pretend that it's an example of Christian charity with the goal of helping the suffering.

Oh, that's right, the money. As of 5 minutes ago they still weren't up to $3000.

It may be this didn't adequately express your point or some such, but you can likely see what I read.

By stressing Christianity over and over, he claims "This is the way Christians should do it." It's not.

It's a crowd funded campaign to a hostile audience. Kind of have to say something.

Besides, you're in the Knights of Columbus ...
Certainly This

When you're in a group that spends millions of dollars on 'charities' which aim to fight against gay people using faith as a banner I'm not sure you're standing on stable ground to critique an outreach activity to opposing an Christian group. My experience as an ex-Roman Catholic is that charity is an effective tool to get people to turn towards Jesus, and we were always told Jesus was referring to vanity and motivation for charity. You could build a claim that these people entirely don't care, but you could build that same hypothetical for the Knights. Orgs like the Knights aren't exactly trying to be Phantom the Ghost that Walks. They're pretty public and very political - their beliefs are not divorced from their charity.

I'm so sorry you passed on the chance to say something awesomely friendly. One more opportunity lost.

Time is better spent making a point else we dwell in the illusionary notion of progress.

originally posted by: charles1952

That poster asked: "If the Gay community really wanted to help, why don't they drop the charges and the lawsuit? The point has been made."

Seems like a bit of a non-point.

A: The gay community is not monolithic
B: Why didn't Jesus just go home and have a cup of tea before throwing the doors of heaven open.

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 08:56 AM
a reply to: Pinke

Since 2005, the Knights of Columbus has provided more than $15.8 million to the campaign to deprive gay and lesbian people of the right to marry the person whom they love, and to undermine the security of children being raised by same-sex parents.

Wow. All that money that could have gone to helping hungry, homeless men, women and children. What a waste of almost $16 million.

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 11:20 AM
a reply to: Pinke

It seems that the Knights "charity" is VERY interested in trying to influence legislation to make Catholic morality LAW and oppressing people and separating them from their rights.

That is a side of the Knight of Columbus that is rarely reported on. According to a new report by Catholics for Choice, "The order has pushed a conservative agenda ranging from the highly specific—a complaint against highschoolers reading Catcher in the Rye—to systemic opposition to reproductive choice and marriage equality through sizable donations to programs run by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and other conservative organizations."

The Knights of Columbus: Crusaders for Discrimination pointed out that the organization "uses its manpower and money to push for legislation that does not match the beliefs of many Catholics or the
 will of the electorate. The Knights continue to wage a decades-long battle against abortion legislation, but what stands out now is the scale of its political expenditures—more than $10 million since 2004—and this does not include funds from the thousands of local fraternity councils and assemblies. The Knights' funding of anti-same-sex marriage campaigns goes towards a cause that is rejected by most Catholics—polling data reflects a stronger support for same-sex marriage among Catholics than any other Christian faith group, or the American population as a whole."

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 11:53 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:04 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:44 PM

Stay on topic.

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:10 PM
Mr. Stolhandske has used a signed, Washington Post Op-ed and a fund raising page in his name to raise money intended for the Klein family. True?

I have said over and over that the acts of the contributors in raising money is a good thing. True? (Update. They're getting close to $3600.)

Mr. Stolhandske, and posters here, have said over and over that this is a model of true Christian love and charity. Especially since the Kleins are hateful distorters of God's word. That, and that their religious beliefs stand in opposition to the idea of gay marriage. True?

All right, if we can agree to all of that, and by "we" I mean those who are still willing to listen to ideas even if I type them, is it acceptable for me to disagree with the idea that this actually is a model of true Christian Love and Charity?

If I am hater simply because I want to question one point (and remember, I haven't made a personal attack against anyone), then what kind of discussion is wanted? it seems that some will accept a conversation only with people who agree with absolutely everything, no questioning allowed.

I'd be delighted to explore this to find out if I am wrong. This is an important issue, and I don't want to go through life with an error in my thinking. If people would like to discuss it, great. If people run away, refuse to talk, call names, etc., what impression am I supposed to have of them?

edit on Thu Oct 23 2014 by Jbird because: Removed OT remarks

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:33 PM
a reply to: charles1952

You're argument is that Mr. Stolhandske is apparently pursuing his fundraising project in an Un-Christian like way. Yet he is an Evangelical Christian himself. To me this makes your argument to simply One Christian claiming to be somehow more Christian than the other. This is also quite convenient too since Mr. Stolhandske is not here to defend his actions or his reasoning. That leaves little room for some of us to even make a judgement for or against what you're saying, even if we wanted to.

If we did, would it really matter to you anyway?? I doubt you're looking for our validation of who's more Christian that the other. Nor would you accept it even if we were to put forth our opinion and it wasn't in your favor. I don't say this to mean you intend to ignore that opinion, but that in no way are you uncertain about where you stand on the issue as to let anyone's opinion sway you. Especially those of us who are not fellow Christians ourselves.

If you want to say, as a Christian, that Mr. Stolhandske, yet another Christian, is being a less than respectable Christian in what he's doing, then by all means do so. I do wonder however what Mr. Stolhandske would respond to you with if he was here to speak for himself on the matter.

From what I've seen and witnessed around here, Christians claiming that other Christians are in reality not "true" Christians is as common as stars in the night sky so I tend not to give any such statements any validity either way.
edit on 23-10-2014 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)

new topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in