Florida’s New Anti-Gay, Anti-Woman Bill May Be the Most Malicious Yet

a reply to: Metallicus

I really thought you were too smart for this. It's not a dig, and it's not a tactic, I'm just really surprised you think being a homosexual is somehow bad.

I used to think like that too, hated gay people, but around 25 I realized there was no reason for it. No one would CHOOSE to be treated poorly. I'm straight, and I can't imagine being able to choose, I imagine gay people can't either. I can't look at a guy and be sexually attracted or want to build a life with him. I love women, I love the female naughty parts and can only see myself with a woman. If someone feels that way about a member of the same sex, who are we to judge it? It doesn't hurt anyone, and I have enough faith in God that I don't presume to think I can punish people for being in love. Be kind to anyone that isn't hurting anyone else. Love thy neighbor. Are we so sure of ourselves we act as God's hand now? Two people that are in love, kind and tender with each other and it's acceptable to treat them poorly? Who do they hurt? How DARE you think that you are worthy of being God's hand on Earth? You treat people with love and respect, if you don't agree with them you pray for them, you don't treat them poorly.

A society should be judged on how it treats it's weakest member, and we are failing that test. There is no rational or spiritual argument for treating gay people poorly. They have done nothing wrong, and they are acting how God made them! There's no internal struggle, they aren't fighting something internally so they can conquer treating people poorly. They simply want to be allowed to love who they love, and I can't see Jesus casting them away when He sacrificed himself for ALL of our sins. There are far greater sins than being gay, but a murderer is apparently better if he finds the light than a gay man who's only sin is loving another man.

You're too smart for this. You really think God hates what he creates? You really think the countless people that hate themselves but can't help but be true to their feelings are all evil, bad people that scoff at that?

It was easy for me to sit up on a high horse, and think gay people were bad, making a choice. Let's be honest with ourselves, who would make that choice? To be shunned and treated so poorly? To go against God, as so many feel they have with the constant ridicule from Christians?

Sit back and think about gay people. How have they made your life worse. Uncomfortable? Me too. Thing is, I don't get a fancy sash that makes me immune to being made uncomfortable. Those rights you love require you being uncomfortable on occasion. So I'll march in a gay pride parade because I love my guns and cling to my religion.

This isn't a Democracy, if it was, your rights could be snuffed out with a popular vote. Remember that. Give some respect for a group that just wants some freedom to love.

originally posted by: redoubt
"A house divided against itself cannot stand."
- Abraham Lincoln
...

Interestingly enough in an Anti Christian thread you quoted Lincoln quoting the Bible.

Mar 3:25
If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Darth_Prime

This seems pretty reasonable to me. No one should have to violate their religious beliefs to participate in the economy.

What religious beliefs state that it is sinful to render aid to other human beings?

What religious beliefs state that it is wrong to sell products to "sinners"?

Why are someone's religious beliefs allowed to affect anyone else besides themselves? (Like a doctor refusing to treat an injured person.)

Why should "religious beliefs" get such coddling, while all other types of difference are told to "suck it up"?

Romans 1:32 makes it pretty clear that it's not ok to condone sin.
2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 point out that association with known sinners is not a good thing and you should do your best to help them see the error of their ways.

Selling products to sinners does not always condone sin. There is a big difference between baking bread for sinners to eat and baking a (themed) cake for a ceremony to celebrate sin.

As for why religion should get "coddled":
Amendment I:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

a reply to: Domo1

"There is no rational or spiritual argument for treating gay people poorly.
Agreed! Now, what constitutes treating someone poorly?

"A society should be judged on how it treats it's weakest member"
So you're pro-life?

"They have done nothing wrong, and they are acting how God made them"
We are all imperfect, but god didn't make us that way, the fall did. We all have struggles, you just want us to accept (and celebrate) some people's complete and total abandonment of the struggle in order to give in to the temptation.


"There's no internal struggle, they aren't fighting something internally so they can conquer"
Maybe they ought to be having an internal struggle, you know, fight off the negative impulses.

"I can't see Jesus casting them away when He sacrificed himself for ALL of our sins."
Nor can I, but I can definitely see him telling them "go forth and sin no more".

"There are far greater sins than being gay"
So you admit it is a sin?

"but a murderer is apparently better if he finds the light than a gay man who's only sin is loving another man."
Yes, those who have turned from sin are in a better place than those who are currently living in sin (begging people to tell them it's not a sin and it's A-OK!).

"You really think God hates what he creates?"
No, but he sure hates some of the things his creations do.

"You really think the countless people that hate themselves but can't help but be true to their feelings are all evil, bad people"
No, I think they're sinners living in sin.

" Let's be honest with ourselves, who would make that choice?"
IDK, who would make the choice to kill another person? To become an addict? To rob a bank? To lie? To abuse their spouse? To molest a child? To do any number of things that are not good? Who makes those choices? A lot of people, that doesn't make them the correct choices to make.

"Sit back and think about gay people. How have they made your life worse."
How have bank robbers made my life worse? Directly, they haven't. How have alcoholics made my life worse? Directly, they haven't. How have liars made my life worse? Directly, they haven't. That doesn't mean we should condone these things. We should not exalt it, or put it on a pedestal. Should homosexual acts be a criminal activity? No. Should it usurp my right to participate in the economy? No. Should it be considered a legitimate alternative to traditional marriage. No.

originally posted by: VelvetPawn
This was a non issue 10 years ago. Why all of the sudden is this an issue now? People were actually tactful and they kept their personal life to themselves not to long ago, remember? It all just magically worked. What happened?
Maybe because people want to shove everything in our face now and make us like it? What did you expect to happen?

What you mean is it all magically worked for you... and now these other folks are coming out of the woodwork and want to do things slightly differently than what you are OK with. And it's rustling your jimmies.

Things will keep changing for a long time, even though every generation thinks the world was complete when they turned 30.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
"A society should be judged on how it treats it's weakest member"
So you're pro-life?

Do you also consider your sperm cells members of society?

a reply to: Subnatural

Not to go off topic completely but: Nope. Life begins at conception, not before. My sperm cells are only half of a life. They don't grow into an individual all by themselves, an embryo does.

a reply to: Gryphon66

you would think that if it was, Hobby Lobby would have a major problem buying most of their inventory from businesses in china when the businesses in china are used as the enforcers when it comes to their one child only policy and we all know how hobby lobby feels about birth control!!!

a reply to: Dfairlite

How is helping to heal someone "condoning sin"?

How is selling a product to someone "condoning sin"?

Is the believer responsible for polling everyone they do business with to make certain they aren't sinners?

Why are only certain sins considered in the "shunning"?

How does "not prohibiting the free exercise of religion" equate to "allowing individuals to ignore any law based on whatever they claim as 'belief'?"

How does the Constitutional restriction affect individual actions rather than governmental ones?

Doesn't your Romans passage regard sinners rather than believers, i.e. sinners approve of sin, not believers?

Doesn't your Thessalonians passage regard what Paul commanded the Thessalonian church to do; i.e. isn't he talking about putting 'peer pressure' on other believers for not obeying his instructions in that 'epistle'?

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Gryphon66

you would think that if it was, Hobby Lobby would have a major problem buying most of their inventory from businesses in china when the businesses in china are used as the enforcers when it comes to their one child only policy and we all know how hobby lobby feels about birth control!!!

Oh Dawnstar, you can't expect these folks to actually practice what they preach, now do you?

After all, there's money involved.

a reply to: Metallicus

but any man that would be attracted to another man instead of a beautiful woman with the proper parts is doing it wrong. I will never understand it and it makes no sense to me.

Your inability to understand does not equate to it being wrong.

Life must be very complicated for you if you always view things you don't understand as necessarily bad or flawed.

Anyways.

In response to your reply to me. It's quite clear you also don't understand what a sexual orientation is. Everything you're saying demonstrates that. It's about attraction, and not 'behavior' specifically.

Yes, we can choose to have sex. The underlying feelings of attraction we do not choose. This is obvious enough to most people of all orientations.

I think that Metallicus has a right to believe as they wish.

I don't understand their belief, and it makes me sad, and not a little personally revolted ... but we've asked what they thought personally, and they've responded apparently very honestly.

Just because someone's actions or beliefs disgust me doesn't give me the right to condemn them.

Gay people, straight people, and all those in-between (who are far more numerous than many wish to admit) all have the right to be repelled and sickened by others ... but as long as we are all being treated equitably by the laws, I personally say "live and let live."

EDIT: By the way, these laws under discussion DO NOT treat everyone equitably, which is why they are wrong and have to go.

originally posted by: Metallicus
Being gay is a lifestyle choice and shouldn't be a protected class. On the other hand religion is also a choice. Therefore I think all of these people deserve each other.

When did you choose to be straight?

Every time I ask someone who says what you just said about being gay I ask them that question. Strangely just about all of them have avoided answering it. Perhaps you could let us know when you choose to be straight.

a reply to: Gryphon66

yes, actually, I do... it's easy to be a christian if all it entails is spouting off bible verses and your beliefs and telling everyone that they are living in sin....it's much harder to actually live the life that you are preaching to others without coming up with excuses everytime your preaching contradicts what is convenient or profitable for you! At one time, long ago, christians held their beliefs strongly enough that they allowed themselves to be devoured by lions. today they'll cave on them for that extra dollar, and won't endure the least bit of pain. if they were to actually live the life that they preached, without finding excuses as the mere sight of some discomfort comes into view, they would at least realize just how stupid some of their preaching really is.

a reply to: dawnstar

Well said. What interests me about the current state of those who call themselves "Christians" is that they are far more interested in obeying the words of Paul than the words of Jesus.

Jesus healed the sick, ate and drank with "sinners" ... and the only people he condemned were those who were religiously hypocritical and lovers of money rather than faith.

a reply to: Gryphon66

"How is helping to heal someone "condoning sin"? "

What are you talking about? Doctors? If you're talking about doctors I don't think one could really use a religious exemption to not care for a homosexual person. That would be the antithesis of christian imo.

"How is selling a product to someone "condoning sin"? "
If I support a ceremony that encourages sin (IE gay marriage) I am condoning that sin.

"Is the believer responsible for polling everyone they do business with to make certain they aren't sinners? "
They aren't. It's pretty obvious when you have someone request a cake with two men on the top. Or when they tell you they want you to take pictures for their gay wedding. Not making cakes for such an occasion or not photographing it are not bigotry so long as you are willing to make them a cake for other such occasions (eg, birthday, party, etc)

"Why are only certain sins considered in the "shunning"?
Condoning any sin is looked down upon by most.
If I sell a gun to someone who I know is going to murder someone with it, that's condoning the sin.
If I sell liqueur at my shop, that's condoning the sin (if it's against my religion to drink liqueur)
If I run a brothel, that's condoning adultery/fornication.
I don't see any inconsistencies, but maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying.

"How does "not prohibiting the free exercise of religion" equate to "allowing individuals to ignore any law based on whatever they claim as 'belief'?"
There are usually two tests, the first is: does the belief require an action by the believer. If yes, then
Does that action reasonably harm another party.
In the case of shop owners not serving homosexual events, no it does not require action and no it does not reasonably harm another party.

"How does the Constitutional restriction affect individual actions rather than governmental ones? "
The restriction only applies to government. They may not infringe upon the exercise of religion.

"Doesn't your Romans passage regard sinners rather than believers, i.e. sinners approve of sin, not believers? "
No. Well, maybe in a round about way, but not in the way you're attempting to construe it.

"Doesn't your Thessalonians passage regard what Paul commanded the Thessalonian church to do; i.e. isn't he talking about putting 'peer pressure' on other believers for not obeying his instructions in that 'epistle'? "
Yes, he is instructing the believers, however that doesn't take away from the idea that if you love someone you shouldn't help condemn their soul in the afterlife.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Metallicus
Being gay is a lifestyle choice and shouldn't be a protected class. On the other hand religion is also a choice. Therefore I think all of these people deserve each other.

When did you choose to be straight?

Every time I ask someone who says what you just said about being gay I ask them that question. Strangely just about all of them have avoided answering it. Perhaps you could let us know when you choose to be straight.

The existence of those feelings is not a choice. Acting upon them, is. Pure and simple. Just because you feel like you should do something doesn't make it the right thing to do, nor does it make it a good thing.

a reply to: Dfairlite

That doesn't make any sense. You are saying that your own god purposely allowed a small percentage of humans to be born into the world whose own bodies naturally temp them towards a grave sin? Meanwhile the other 80 - 90% of humans live their whole lives without this problem.

I mean, at least you've managed to rationalize in your mind the hypocrisy I'm exposing by asking that question, but it makes your god look like an idiot or a hypocrite to anyone paying attention.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Dfairlite

That doesn't make any sense. You are saying that your own god purposely allowed a small percentage of humans to be born into the world whose own bodies naturally temp them towards a grave sin? Meanwhile the other 80 - 90% of humans live their whole lives without this problem.

I mean, at least you've managed to rationalize in your mind the hypocrisy I'm exposing by asking that question, but it makes your god look like an idiot or a hypocrite to anyone paying attention.

Yeah, we all have demons man. Some of us have trials of lust, greed, sloth, wrath, gluttony, envy, and/or pride. Some have many some have few.

God would only seem like an idiot to someone who believed god was most concerned with life being fair in this single stage of it. God is not worried about that, we are here for our eternal development and any trials we face and overcome only help us in that development. The goal for God is to create strong children for eternity, this is just a phase of that and God knows what is best for us in this phase, to make us grow and fulfill our divine potential.

a reply to: Gryphon66

when I was going to church one of my friends from that church would always harp on me about me wearing jeans. one day, I came home and low and behold, she was wearing jeans! so I asked her about it. well, come to find out that she got a temporary gig that she would have to climb up a ladder to do, so the pants was appropriate in her eyes. what she didn't know was that while our pastor was working on the church on a daily basis putting a new roof on it most of the time with just him and his wife there, I was also there at least doing what I could to make things easier for them..... in my view the no pants crap just hindered what I could do for other people, I didn't care about the money or any other kind of reward, I just felt sorry for the old man and his wife and wanted to help.

would god send a person into a den of sin, causing him to stain his clean white soul just to reach out and pull one soul out of the hell he put himself into? I say he would, and am pretty sure god would pull them both out safely. there's no reason for all the judgements and insensitive garbage that is being thrown around by those who are professing to be God's chosen lights in the darkness.

a reply to: Dfairlite

a business is free to decide what they keep in their inventory, there is nothing forcing them to order cake decorations with two men!