Christian florist v. homosexual couple in WA

It would help if you actually knew what you were talking about. Genesis 2:24: a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.

 

He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate." Matthew 19:4-6 (ESV)

 

Oh it’s clear who doesn’t know what they are talking about, lol.

Nothing there about marriage. Nothing there saying marriage is only between 1 man and 1 woman, as I said. Thank you for illustrating.

 

Not one word about marriage there, let alone marriage only between 1 man and 1 woman.

 

So was Dred Scott and Plessey v. Ferguson.

 

What, you think they were shacking up? That's referred to as fornication.

 

I’m sorry but nowhere in your quoted verse is marriage mentioned or defined.

 

There was no need to.

 

You do not have the slightest CLUE what "they become one flesh" is do you?

 

Such delusions as "gay marriage", obviously.

And an intelligent person would find that compelling because...?

 

I am still not seeing where it says that particular amendment applies to anyone but congress, let me post it for you:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Care to point it out?

 

Forcing a Christian baker to use his artistic talents to facilitate a gay 'marriage' is prohibiting the free exercise of religion. You don't lose your 1A rights when you open a bakery.

 

My logic is tortured because I pointed to a verse that could be taken to discriminate against handicap people disproving your earlier claim that none exists? And you refuse to show how these laws should only apply to gay people but all other groups being protected is a ‘necessary force’? Ok....

Cheers then

 

You don’t get to set what an individual believes, some believe the entire Bible is valid, others believe only certain books, and others believe only certain passages as it suits their argument.

 

Does preventing a man from selling his daughter into slavery go against their free exercise of religion or do you admit their are limits?

For the record, I completely agree with you — I just think it is wrong to single out just gay people. If individuals don’t want to serve others they shouldn’t have to (black brown, Christian, Muslim, gay red head and so on). But zero of you are arguing this, you are just arguing it’s acceptable to discriminate against gay people and gay people only. As long as protections exist for a single group but not for another then the law is unjust.

 

That doesn’t say two men should not be allowed to marry. It is more about divorce than who can marry.

Will y’all start protesting divorce laws next and with the same ferocity you have with marriage equality?

 

The shouldn’t have to

Prior to gay people public accommodation laws have been seldom mentioned except during a few lawsuits, now many are arguing it is against the first amendment

We are unable to compare the similarities of the arguments being made against gay people to those made against blacks and women.

This has happened already, the doctor was not instantly fired

It’s self evident

 

And your views are irrelevant to the Christian baker's. The vast majority of Christianity historically and even now view sodomy as a disordered abomination.

 

sure he could of been gay, and probably was

Christians really need to read their bible more...... ironically he also mention Simon not giving him a kiss... or putting oil on his head

Then he turned toward the woman and said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I came into your house. You did not give me any water for my feet, but she wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. 45 You did not give me a kiss, but this woman, from the time I entered, has not stopped kissing my feet. 46 You did not put oil on my head, but she has poured perfume on my feet. 47 Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little.”

 

If we were members of the OT theocracy of Israel you might have a point.

That's not what we're saying, all the Christian business owners in question do serve gay people, they don't want to facilitate gay marriages that violate their conscience and 1A religious freedom rights.

 

You are the one arguing that OT laws do not apply. Not me.

I think all of your beliefs are contradictory and cannot wait till the day they can no longer be used to mandate law or exemption. Your beliefs are no more valid than the Church of the Flying Spaghetti monster

 

No, 2,000 years of Christianity say they don't apply, see Galations. New Testament basically means New Covenant.

Perhaps you should start a movement to repeal the 1A.

Did the FSM fulfill prophecy, perform miracles and rise from the dead?

 

Not you again ....

 

You think "wife" there does not refer to a woman?

 

Yes, I was just reviewing the majority opinion in Masterpiece Bakery and notice that the cour there relied on the freedom of association prong of the first amendment, not religion.