It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Okay kids, do Christian artists HAVE to draw same-sex material

page: 4
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
I just want to know why religious folk are so " judgey ".


It's because most of them have deep dark secrets.
Just like the worst homophobes are actually gay and can't come to terms with it.

People are projecting what they hate in themselves


That’s a very judgmental thing to say about those who don’t agree with certain sexual practices.

Tired of reading that BS excuse.

So by that reasoning I could say that if you are against having sex with children it is because deep down you are a peadophile.


edit on 22-12-2018 by Sheye because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
I just want to know why religious folk are so " judgey ".


It's because most of them have deep dark secrets.
Just like the worst homophobes are actually gay and can't come to terms with it.

People are projecting what they hate in themselves



So Trump haters...are really Trump-like, but can't come to terms with it.
Interesting.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


But, that's what their claiming....that their work is not a "public accommodation" because it's religious "artistic expression". But, it's generic calligraphy and floral accented wedding invitations, that don't reflect anything unique or religious. Therefore, FAIL.

If they could show that their work features religious themes, especially tailored to the individual couple's religous convictions, they might have a case.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT




So Trump haters...are really Trump-like, but can't come to terms with it. Interesting.


There is actually a lot of truth to that too!



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
I just want to know why religious folk are so " judgey ".


It's because most of them have deep dark secrets.
Just like the worst homophobes are actually gay and can't come to terms with it.

People are projecting what they hate in themselves



So Trump haters...are really Trump-like, but can't come to terms with it.
Interesting.




Oh well then Hillary haters are like Hillary... Too funny..



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Sounds like capitalism to me.


But not so much forced, as spoonfed, open up here comes the PC Choo-Choo train.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Who are you to define whether they consider their work art or not?

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
I just want to know why religious folk are so " judgey ".


It's because most of them have deep dark secrets.
Just like the worst homophobes are actually gay and can't come to terms with it.

People are projecting what they hate in themselves



So Trump haters...are really Trump-like, but can't come to terms with it.
Interesting.




Oh well then Hillary haters are like Hillary... Too funny..

That would make me a male lesbian...so YES.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


I don't define it, the law does, and the courts have been very clear on this issue. Consumers shouldn't be ambushed, insulted and rejected when they reach out to a public accommodation business as customers. These people offer a generic service, specializing in wedding invitations. Nowhere do they say that they specialize in the religious artistic expression of marriage, nor do their artistic displays on their website indicate any kind of religious theme.

Perhaps if their website emphasized their Christian values and their interpretation of marriage, then gay customers wouldn't be blindsided by their pious rejection, alienation and judgement, especially since they want to claim they're exempt from public accomadation law, because their work rises to the level of religous artistic expression.



edit on 22-12-2018 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Who are the courts to define whether they consider their work as art or not?

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:53 PM
link   
So the artist HAS to use their voice and personal expression in a way that the law dictates?

Nice world some of you want to live in.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
I just want to know why religious folk are so " judgey ".


It's because most of them have deep dark secrets.
Just like the worst homophobes are actually gay and can't come to terms with it.

People are projecting what they hate in themselves



So Trump haters...are really Trump-like, but can't come to terms with it.
Interesting.




Oh well then Hillary haters are like Hillary... Too funny..

That would make me a male lesbian...so YES.




You're free to identify as whatever you like...



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:56 PM
link   
blinks

this SEEMS to parse down to :

they can write a mans name and a womans name , or draw pictures of a man and a woman

but if they have to draw 2 men or two women , or write 2 mens // womens names

they is oppressed ????? - will the bouy named sue - make thier heads explode ????????????????

stop the world - i need to get off



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: LedermanStudio
So the artist HAS to use their voice and personal expression in a way that the law dictates?

Nice world some of you want to live in.




Only the authoritarian among us want to force other people to do things they don't want to.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Allaroundyou

So if a business didn’t want to serve thems colored folk, you’d support their decision.


I'd have to hear their reason for it first. I've yet to hear the reason convincing enough for me to think they weren't being racist, but someday someone might actually have a legitimate reason for it that no one has brought up yet.



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

No, it doesn't.

It parses down to celebrating sacrilege when those two men or two women are entering what they call a marriage.

May as well force a Muslim butcher to prepare a pig in the halal manner. It achieves the same ends -- it forces the butcher to become spiritually unclean even if you can't see why he cannot kill the pig in that manner and say the prayers over it.

What is going on is that the people who won't see this issue from the point of view of the religious prefer to believe it is only and ever a cynical use of religion to justify personal bigotry.
edit on 22-12-2018 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha



Agreeing with the plaintiffs and the attorney general, Ekstrom asserted that “no Court has ever held that religiously motivated conduct, expressive or otherwise, trumps state discrimination law in public accommodations.” He also pointed out that Stutzman is not a minister nor is Arlene’s Flowers a religious organization. Likewise, the law does not specifically target her because of her beliefs, but is “neutral and generally applicable” to all people of all beliefs.

Ekstrom agreed that “the State’s compelling interest in combating discrimination in public accommodations is well settled” and is not superseded by an individual’s religious beliefs. As the Supreme Court wrote in the 1982 case United States v. Lee, “When followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes which are binding on others in that activity. Granting an exemption… operates to impose [the follower’s] religious faith on the [person sought to be protected by the law.]”
thinkprogress.org...

UPDATED: State Supreme Court Says Florist Who Refused to Serve Gay Couple Violated Anti-Discrimination Law www.thestranger.com... anti-discrimination-law



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 10:07 PM
link   
Maybe they are in the wrong business. I hear women make the best snipers. Maybe they should change professions.

Oh , wrong thread. Sorry!
edit on 22-12-2018 by visitedbythem because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 10:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Would a black Taylor have to make clan robes?


Would a self respecting clan's man wear a robe make by a black tailor?



Would you eat a cake the baker likely spit in?


Is that a Christian thing?


It's a human thing.

I don't Think thats a Christian thing... I'm not sure why it matters. I just wouldn't try to force anyone to make me any food when I know they don't want to. It's just not something I would do. Maybe they wouldn't spit in it but they probably wouldn't do the best job they could do. They might screw it up any number of ways, but you know what, even if I sat there and watched them and knew it was made perfectly and sanitarily, I still wouldn't eat it unless I really needed the sustenance. The "spirit" of the meal would be, um, well it would not be to my liking. I guess I'm a bit of a stickler when it comes to slavery. But hey, that's more for you, so eat up!



posted on Dec, 22 2018 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha

It's about not wanting to participate in what they feel is sacrilege.

Where does that line stop? Some of the city ordinances that are being passed are already attempting to label churches as "public accommodation" meaning that churches, mosques, temples, etc., that do not recognize a marriage as anything except between one man and one woman could be compelled to host and otherwise endorse SS unions.







 
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join