Christian florist v. homosexual couple in WA

If we didn’t have the separation of religion from the state we’d be back to burning gays, lesbians and so called witches at the stake.
I’m always left though with the question, given the thousands of peculiar prohibitions in the Bible, why so many fundamentalists focus on homosexuality.
I suppose we shouldn’t be puzzled given the love affair between David and Jonathan in the Old Testament is interpreted as mere homosociality. HMMM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_and_Jonathan

 

4 to 20 times higher.

 

It is a "fact" which you cannot support! What IS a FACT, is that you don't know what "become one flesh" means!

 

In what way does it harm the one being discriminated against? You seem to be going off course! Remember, you stated your definition of the legitimate authority of Gov't and what the limits are to this authority:

So where does the baker's discrimination fit in the above definition?

Alright, then I'll rephrase:

No, his business wouldn't normally be asked to make pizzas for a same sex wedding. I'm guessing that's not a normal request.

 

WTF? You said that it is "far more difficult to claim "artistic license"" Are you unable to explain why it is far more difficult?

 

That's the point. There's no way of knowing if she decided to no longer sell him flowers because of his sexual orientation.

Why wouldn't you view catering weddings as a "special service" for a pizza shop owner and not the main business, which is selling pizza?

What if it wasn't a religious baker?

It's not outside the realms of possibility that she would assign a staff member to do a wedding set up. I don't think that we can use that as an argument, unless they state that they would be doing the work at the wedding.

 

Keep in mind that very few actually used the label "Atheist". But given their writings many of those who claimed Deist are considered to have been actually atheist. Jefferson and Paine were prominent among them, and there were others, especially among the lessor known writers of the DOI and Constitution.

A standard lie told by many and believed by more. Most Atheists don't believe in the "might makes right" mindset. You don't need religion to have morals.

 

I’ve repeatedly proven it’s not defined in the Bible, lol

No matter how badly you wish otherwise, marriage is not defined anywhere in the Bible. Sorry.

 

The primary issue with the narrative that this study successfully tries to link pedophilia to homosexuality is that they find the current percentage estimate of self identified gay males — in this case it is 2-4% — and compare that to the number of homosexual pedophilia based on crime analysis. That presents a significant variable that cannot be accounted for because if even one of those individuals in the second group self identify as a heterosexual in their ‘regular’ life then the first groups self assessment percentage is no longer valid. Thus the entire study is invalid if you are using it to find a relationship between gay men and homosexual pedophiles — they are not the same subgroup.

Looking at the fact that the vast majority of child abusers identify as heterosexual (they are usually parents or close family members) your metrics are likely way off the mark, then there is this from the study that you missed: This finding does not imply that homosexuals are more likely to molest children, just that a larger percentage of pedophiles are homosexual or bisexual in orientation to children. You must have accidentally left that part out...

Then there is this:
“When reviewing research studies on pedophilia, it must be remembered that there is a strong potential for sampling biases. Many studies obtained their pedophilic or sexual offender populations from prisons or legally mandated sexual treatment groups. This sampling raises questions about the subjects’ willingness to be honest and/or to in- criminate themselves on self-report surveys.5,7,23 The prison populations also exclude pedophiles who have not been caught, those whose level of offense was not severe enough to result in jail time, those who could control their im- pulses, and those who were more financially successful and better able to prevail in their legal troubles through the retention of private attorneys.7,27 This sampling introduces the possibility that the findings of lower intelligence, per- sonality disorder, and an overall reduced level of function- ing are more characteristic of pedophiles who were arrested than the characteristics of the group as a whole.11,23 Also, many studies are based on small sampling sizes.7,27 Finally, the findings from one study may not be generalizable to another because of significant differences that exist between pedophilic subgroups and the children they abuse.”


Did you have a point or just trolling like usual?

 

So a business is now a living thing? Should we allow businesses to marry?

 

No it doesn't. It has an assumed coercive nature based upon preconceived notions that may or may not exist in a given relationship. We have seen numerous cases where siblings or even parent/child have gotten together unknowingly, have had sex and/or gotten married, and even had children (with no birth defects in the cases I am aware of) before ever learning about their relationship. Where exactly is the coerscive nature in those cases of incest? We are in an era where a parent can drop a child off at the hospital with no information taken. If siblings born apart in time and place are both given up thus, they can potentially find each other, not knowing their relationship, and get involved together. Where is the coerscive nature in that? Even without a lack of information when given up for adoption, children given up in different locations or through different agencies might never know of their siblings or parents. How is it coercive then if they do hook up with them? In the cases of first cousins (which is legal in some states, illegal in others) who meet for the first time, knowing they are related. There is no past dynamic for any coercion to exist, so where is that inherent coercive nature?

And for that matter, what exactly is the supposed coercive nature of incest? What form does it take? How is it different from my other coercive action that it requires separate legislation?

Exactly what state interest in is served that isn't already covered by other laws?

 

If you are talking about rape and power then gender of the victim doesn't matter. If you are talking about the actual disorder of pedophilia, that is usually not accompanied by a gender preference per se, save maybe as opportunity presents. Many pedophiles who have had male victims are only attracted to female adults.

 

No but the people who rin them are...

 

The CDC is irrelevant as you are making universal type claims. You have given no population limiting criteria. For the claims you are making the World Health Organization is the appropriate source for your data.

 

".......just that a larger percentage of pedophiles are homosexual or bisexual in orientation to children."

Pretty much says it all.

 

You all will notice religion and religious practice is a protected class by not only the First Amendment to the Constitution as a constitutional right but also Codified in the Civil Rights Act. Alas LGBT is simply not there. That puts them in the same category as folks with red hair or thick mustaches and bushy eyebrows. Change the Constitution if ya don't like it.

 

Addressed all of this already. If you want to marry your sister, take your case to court. As of now, those bans are constitutional. Let us know how it goes.

 

That was rather non sequitur. The idea that a person would run their business as they run their life is not far fetched.

 

Actually the courts have already ruled that since orientation and gender identity are based upon sex, they too are covered.

 

Ah avoidance. You can't answer the questions posed as to show the interests and the need for separate laws, nor can you support your claim of inherent coercion. I've presented the arguments that counter your claim. Either you can actually counter mine, or simply concede. I'll take silence as concession.

But here let me ask again.

What exactly is the supposed coercive nature of incest? What form does it take? How is it different from my other coercive action that it requires separate legislation? Exactly what state interest in is served that isn't already covered by other laws? What is the coercive component in the relationship examples I provided above?

 

It wasn't until they used their business to push religion. At least the lawyers get to make money!!!

 

I have no obligation to keep addressing the same thing over and over. I avoided nothing. You asked, and you were answered. I don’t need to answer the same question again. Just refer you to the answer I gave.

 

Which has nothing to do with homosexuals for the purpose of this thread. But deflect away. It’s all your side has.

 

I have missed posts before. So which post or post have you answered those question? I'll be happy to go back and read it.