Religious Freedom Bills: giving the freedom to discriminate!

a reply to: Joecanada11

The Bill of Rights give people the freedom to discriminate in a non-violent and non-slanderous manor. Its the government that has no right to discriminate.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not stand up against judicial review in an honest and objective court.

a reply to: Unity_99

And it takes some old testament law to accomplish that? Christ may not find you worthy either. What is it with evangelicals? Where did their god say to get involved in politics, make laws, and stone "the others".

a reply to: MOMof3
I'm not sure where you got that from Unity_99's post.


Perhaps I misinterpreted his/her post but I took it to mean this... (I'll use an example from my personal life).


I have some friends at work that are vegetarians. When we go to lunch together and it's "my turn" to choose the place, even if I'm in the mood for a big, juicy burger I won't drag them to a burger joint. I'll choose to go to maybe an Italian place where I can have a beef dish and they can have either pasta or salads or pizza or whatever.


I could be wrong in my interpretation of Unity_99's post, but I'm thinking that he is advocating a philosophy of, "Don't go out of your way to bother others and he/she wont go out of his/her way to bother others."

I could be wrong but that's what I was thinking as I read that exchange.

a reply to: eluryh22

Why are evangelicals writing laws? What's next muslims? Wiccans? Final Solutions?

originally posted by: MOMof3
a reply to: eluryh22

Why are evangelicals writing laws? What's next muslims? Wiccans? Final Solutions?

There's a growing movement among evangelicals called the Dominionism and the Seven Mountain Kingdom which basically claims that America is a Christian nation. Their goal is basically having Christians take over government , entertainment, big business etc and bring theocracy "back".

originally posted by: Joecanada11
Many red states have been passing so called "religious freedom bills" Tennessee being the latest.

www.msnbc.com...

What I am wondering. Is how does baking a cake for someone who happens to be attracted to someone of the same sex interfere with the way one practices their faith?

Personally I see it as nothing more than giving evangelical Christians the ability to discriminate without having to worry about the possibility of lawsuits.

The same logic could be used to say that someone should be allowed to refuse service to Christians or Muslims because that is what my religious beliefs tell me. This is a big step backwards in treating all people with equality and basic human rights. Nobody should be refused rights of service because of the way they are born. Science has shown us that sexual preference is not a choice. However treating all humans as equals is a choice.

How does denying a homosexual a wedding cake show Christs love.

I wonder if a Christian could answer that simple question

There are two laws for christians to follow, Christs teachings and Secular law

How does homosexuality interfere in Christs teachings to christians and their personal relationship with God

I am not for homosexuals getting married, I understand why they would want to mirror that practice.
I am also not against it, its a secular law

It doesnt belong in a christian church

a reply to: Raggedyman

Thank you! Much respect to that response!

a reply to: Raggedyman

How does denying a homosexual a wedding cake show Christs love.

A valid question.

To play Devil's advocate.... would making a cake for a Neo-Nazi Adolf Hitler party show Christ's love? Would people that condemn anti-gay-wedding-cake-bakers (for lack of a better term) be OK with a baker taking part in that celebration if they also made gay-wedding cakes?

My point is that it is subjective.... and that is why the Government should stay out of it.

If people want to be A-holes, then that is up to them and I believe that is their right. It is also my right to not give them my business (and also hope they go out of business) but it should end there.

Whether a person is religious or not we can all lead by example.

There are two laws for christians to follow, Christs teachings and Secular law

That is probably the bigger question. There are times (abortion, the death penalty for example) where there is a struggle between the two.

a reply to: eluryh22

We are talking about homosexuals, not the other issues you have raised, all very valid and reasonable

Its tricky.

I disagree with abortion, I will love the woman who has lost a child

I agree with the death penalty if instituted by a secular government, I will love the condemned

originally posted by: Unity_99
Because dear one, we have free will. And no one has the right to force someone in a private business, (this is opposite of a health or education mandatory job) to go against their belief.

I don't think you're correct in your example. There is nothing more mandatory about the job of Baker vs. Doctor or Teacher. Nobody forces the Doctor to be a Doctor or the Teacher a Teacher any more than they Force the Baker to be a Baker. All three chose by that same "Free Will" you mention to become those things.

Just to clear up some of the bad examples given so far. Every case of a baker denying service to a gay person for their wedding never was asked to write or decorate that cake in any abnormal way that I'm aware of. They were simply asked to make a wedding cake, which is what they do. It just happened to be for a wedding of a same sex couple. They didn't have to go serve it or go to the wedding. They didn't even have to like the idea of a same sex wedding.

They were asked to do what they openly advertise to the public as the service they provide. Period. There was nothing anywhere that said anything about them Refusing to Serve Homosexual Couples or anyone else. After all, it came down to their "Personal Beliefs" as to why they wouldn't do their job. How is someone supposed to know what someone else chooses for their Personal Beliefs??? Not even every devout Christian holds their same beliefs.

When everyone quits playing games with this and stops with all the BS "what if's" what we're left with is a group of people that want special privilege to discriminate against a group of people for nothing more than "Because they Believe they should get what others don't get." Which is to treat a group of people as unequal and less than themselves and others both legally and professionally based on arbitrary belief.