Gay Rights or Freedom of Religion and Speech?

CherubRam

New member
You can't reason with hate, especially when it's hiding behind religion.

What a sad, sad, image of Christianity this thread projects.
So you love evil and hate good.
We are instructed to hate evil and love righteousness.

Psalm 97:10.
Let those who love the Lord hate evil, for he guards the lives of his faithful ones and delivers them from the hand of the wicked.

Proverbs 8:13.
To fear the Lord is to hate evil; I hate pride and arrogance, evil behavior and perverse speech.

Amos 5:15.
Hate evil, love good
; maintain justice in the courts. Perhaps the Lord God Almighty will have mercy on the remnant of Joseph.


Micah 3:2.
you who hate good and love evil; who tear the skin from my people and the flesh from their bones;

John 3:20.
Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.

John 7:7.
The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that its works are evil.

Romans 12:9.
Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good.
 

CherubRam

New member
There seems to be a lot of people masquerading as Christians on this forum. Probably to lead those who are searching for the truth astray.
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Gay people have the right to live in a secular society free from your religions persecution. When a Christian opens business in the secular world then a persons religion or sexual orientation should not be a consideration.

The founding Fathers rightfully guaranteed by force my right to rebuke faggots and their supporters like 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.
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The louder you get, the louder I get. I say that because at least one person is confused and will not fight for the truth nor decency.
 

republicanchick

New member
The only time that wouldn't be the case is when they are being used to harm another person. Rejecting a total stranger (as in customer) does not constitute harm, btw.

it would be a great harm to ME if I had to photograph a gay wedding. That is an infringement on MY freedom.. freedom of association, and of religion.
 

TracerBullet

New member
So, according to you Christians forfeit freedom of speech and religion when dealing with the public.
they do neither. NO one is being the denied to worship as they see fit and no one is silenced. At the same time no one gets to discriminate against a minority

For a Christian you sure have a lot of Antichristian comments.

Its sad you think that treating others they way you would want to be treated is antichristian
 

TracerBullet

New member
But refuse to answer them apparently.

Do you or do you not support the right for 3 men to marry?
Do you or do you not support the right of an adult man to marry his adult sister?
Do you or do you not support the rights of man to marry multiple women?

I don't know of any logical / legal reason to oppose these, that is why I asked you why you do. I've asked you that before and then like now you avoid answering.
 

TracerBullet

New member
An interesting side note is what happened to the Oklahoma "religious freedom" law. State representative Emily Virgin added an amendment to that states proposed law stating: "Businesses or companies not wanting to participate" in a business exchange based on the sexual orientation, gender identity or race of either party shall post notice of such refusal in a manner clearly visible to the public in all places of business, including websites."

The bill died a fast death immediately after.
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
An interesting side note is what happened to the Oklahoma "religious freedom" law. State representative Emily Virgin added an amendment to that states proposed law stating: "Businesses or companies not wanting to participate" in a business exchange based on the sexual orientation, gender identity or race of either party shall post notice of such refusal in a manner clearly visible to the public in all places of business, including websites."

The bill died a fast death immediately after.

Nothing wrong with that.
 

Dialogos

Well-known member
I don't know of any logical / legal reason to oppose these, that is why I asked you why you do. I've asked you that before and then like now you avoid answering.
Got it. I do, for reasons of faith and morality.

BTW, so does my pastor. So lets say that an adult biological brother and sister approach an orthodox Rabbi and ask him to perform their marriage ceremony.

He politely declines on the grounds that such a union is an affront to his faith.

Is that Rabbi a bigot?

If justice is served, should he face civil punishment for acting on his convictions?
 

TracerBullet

New member
Got it. I do, for reasons of faith and morality.

neither of these are a logical or a legal reason


BTW, so does my pastor. So lets say that an adult biological brother and sister approach an orthodox Rabbi and ask him to perform their marriage ceremony.

He politely declines on the grounds that such a union is an affront to his faith.

Is that Rabbi a bigot?

If justice is served, should he face civil punishment for acting on his convictions?

What nonsense. No one is obliged to perform a wedding ceremony.
 

Lon

Well-known member
What nonsense. No one is obliged to perform a wedding ceremony.
:doh: You really need to catch up. Yes some certainly are obliged, or at least those are the lawsuits that are passed and being contested. If a couple comes to my church and asks me to marry them, as soon as I allow access to one, the lawsuits are pushing that I then must allow all.

They forget that the free-exercise thereof, is my religious conviction, but they are suing none-the-less.

We've allowed 1% of the population to tell 99% how to live. That is absurd.
 
Top