SCOTUS Rulings

[Esaias]

There is no solution, no "middle ground" that will work to satisfy everyone.

The only thing that matters in the end is that God's Truth is promoted. The farmer doesn't worry about being "fair" to the chaff. "Oh, but what if the chaff gangs up on his wheat and turns the tables?" Well, must have been because the farmer wasn't paying attention to the state of his crops...

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by Esaias

There is no solution, no "middle ground" that will work to satisfy everyone.

The only thing that matters in the end is that God's Truth is promoted. The farmer doesn't worry about being "fair" to the chaff. "Oh, but what if the chaff gangs up on his wheat and turns the tables?" Well, must have been because the farmer wasn't paying attention to the state of his crops...

amen

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

There must remain as little restraint on religion as possible. If you are counting on the red, white.and blue to maintain the liberties we have to meet, to express Christ's love and value, to teach our children the way that is narrow, then you place a very precious trust in the hands of some verifiable nutcases. Rome already seems to be rearing an ugly horn from the midst of the EU. This horn will allow any religion that aligns with it, to flourish. All real God fearing thought will be as faint and welcome as actual free speech is on our college campuses already. A few snowflakes amount to some fun and a day off, many for a long time can cause inconvenience, a storm if them with thunder and wind can bring catastrophe. I feel we are at the beginnings of the storm, this pope supports the snowflakes, this cannot bode well for the beleivers in the message of the Apostles- other than to solidify in our minds the fact that prophecy is true.

I dont care if its Wika that refuse to bake cakes, they deserve the right. Not because of any of any agreement with them, but because they are (wrong or not) a religion. A beleif system that beleives in a higher power. It was protected under the original negative rights assigned to gooberment as fences where it should not infringe.
I sincerly beleive that unless a great many are worn out by the continual whinning from our fringe of leftest victimization of literally everyone except good hard working, and God fearing folk. Then it is likely infringement will begin with those they see as marginal, and a threat. If they go after Wika they think they are a threat. As with many other programs done according to the book of Saul Alinski (spelling might be wrong)...this will appear sound and moderate to those not Wika....Until that is they start on the Baptists.....or more likely on the WPF or UPC, being smaller, seen as fringe organizations. Therefore I disagree with the MUST be restraints

I have to share my thoughts on this because I have mixed feelings.

First, I don't believe any non-profit church or religious 501(c) organization should be forced to participate in or facilitate anything that goes against their religious beliefs. Not under any circumstance.

However, if one is incorporated as a for profit business LLC that serves the general public, I'm hard pressed to justify any form of discrimination based on civil statutes governing discrimination. Imagine if your favorite "Christian" bakery refused to sell you a wedding cake because you're Apostolic, and they "don't do cult weddings". Why is your money not good enough to purchase your favorite kind of cake for your wedding simply based upon your religion? Where is your right to do business with legal tender in a free market? Should they be able to deny you that right, based only on your religion?

Now, if the bakery was a business that catered strictly to private and registered "Christian" members who subscribe to their goods and services, I can see them having a right to turn away anyone based on not being "members" holding Christian principles.

To not enforce some standard of non-discrimination, as it relates to businesses that serve the general public, could open a Pandora's box of everyone discriminating against everyone else over various religious convictions or individual convictions relating to religion.

[Amanah]

It's pride month here at work, and in the monthly newsletter there are pics of girly looking guys and butch looking girls, I'm wondering when it's going to be Christian appreciation month.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Amanah

It's pride month here at work, and in the monthly newsletter there are pics of girly looking guys and butch looking girls, I'm wondering when it's going to be Christian appreciation month.

lol

You mean a sinful world is acting like... a sinful world? My stars! LOL

Let it go. Don't let anything disturb your peace. The world will be the world. Just focus on being a loving light to a lost world desperately looking for love in all the wrong places.

[BuckeyeBukaroo]

Originally Posted by Wilsonwas

There must remain as little restraint on religion as possible. If you are counting on the red, white.and blue to maintain the liberties we have to meet, to express Christ's love and value, to teach our children the way that is narrow, then you place a very precious trust in the hands of some verifiable nutcases. Rome already seems to be rearing an ugly horn from the midst of the EU. This horn will allow any religion that aligns with it, to flourish. All real God fearing thought will be as faint and welcome as actual free speech is on our college campuses already. A few snowflakes amount to some fun and a day off, many for a long time can cause inconvenience, a storm if them with thunder and wind can bring catastrophe. I feel we are at the beginnings of the storm, this pope supports the snowflakes, this cannot bode well for the beleivers in the message of the Apostles- other than to solidify in our minds the fact that prophecy is true.

I dont care if its Wika that refuse to bake cakes, they deserve the right. Not because of any of any agreement with them, but because they are (wrong or not) a religion. A beleif system that beleives in a higher power. It was protected under the original negative rights assigned to gooberment as fences where it should not infringe.
I sincerly beleive that unless a great many are worn out by the continual whinning from our fringe of leftest victimization of literally everyone except good hard working, and God fearing folk. Then it is likely infringement will begin with those they see as marginal, and a threat. If they go after Wika they think they are a threat. As with many other programs done according to the book of Saul Alinski (spelling might be wrong)...this will appear sound and moderate to those not Wika....Until that is they start on the Baptists.....or more likely on the WPF or UPC, being smaller, seen as fringe organizations. Therefore I disagree with the MUST be restraints

No. I wasn't being sarcastic in the examples Isited. Those are just the three most egregious practices of religion that I could think of that must remain outlawed for the good of our society.

If I try hard, I can thinK of more exampled AND none of the examples I listed are far-fetched.

[BuckeyeBukaroo]

I am not looking for government to protect my religion, but by God's Grace, we live here and we are free. I do think there is a place for government to protect our human society from destructive and immoral religious practices.

[Wilsonwas]

Originally Posted by BuckeyeBukaroo

I am not looking for government to protect my religion, but by God's Grace, we live here and we are free. I do think there is a place for government to protect our human society from destructive and immoral religious practices.

I do agree with you on that, perhaps my nearly ancap view can be a little restraining. I think we need to be careful with statements like ...."protect our human society from destructive an immoral religious practices"....
There are sheep that think we are destructive and immoral. The snowflakes we mock now, may be in power shortly. Hand them too much...and its off with our heads. They do seem to exibit an odd procivity to cog-dis....in that they will scream for the rights of some that toss gays off a roof, but will grill a christian baker in his own over for a refusal of service.
For this reason I seek as little law, and as little gooberment as is absolutely neccessary- allowing the non- agression principle as the primary directive for governance.

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Aquila

However, if one is incorporated as a for profit business LLC that serves the general public, I'm hard pressed to justify any form of discrimination based on civil statutes governing discrimination. Imagine if your favorite "Christian" bakery refused to sell you a wedding cake because you're Apostolic, and they "don't do cult weddings". Why is your money not good enough to purchase your favorite kind of cake for your wedding simply based upon your religion? Where is your right to do business with legal tender in a free market? Should they be able to deny you that right, based only on your religion?

Here's the thing, if they had come in to buy a pre-made cake and just decorated it themselves, there wouldn't have been an issue. That they wanted a new cake made to their exact specifications, means they're asking the owner of the business to use their artistic talent, in order to make something that celebrates a lifestyle which is in direct opposition to said owners beliefs.

Imagine going to a Muslim or Jewish bakery and asking them to make a cake with a pig on the top, and writing "I love bacon" around it. Shouldn't they have the right to refuse that, due to their dietary and religious beliefs? This case is no different. They weren't asking them to just sell them a cake, they were asking an artist to use their talents in violation of their beliefs. That's why this is wrong.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Jito463

Here's the thing, if they had come in to buy a pre-made cake and just decorated it themselves, there wouldn't have been an issue. That they wanted a new cake made to their exact specifications, means they're asking the owner of the business to use their artistic talent, in order to make something that celebrates a lifestyle which is in direct opposition to said owners beliefs.

Imagine going to a Muslim or Jewish bakery and asking them to make a cake with a pig on the top, and writing "I love bacon" around it. Shouldn't they have the right to refuse that, due to their dietary and religious beliefs? This case is no different. They weren't asking them to just sell them a cake, they were asking an artist to use their talents in violation of their beliefs. That's why this is wrong.

We choose how to look at things. It's a choice. Don't let anyone tell you how you must view or respond to life. Me personally, I'd sell them the cake. As a Christian baker, I'd strive to make them the best cake ever. An example of Christian craftsmanship. I'd show them love and human to human respect. Yet all the while I was making it, I'd pray that God move in their lives and do what He must to help them change their direction in life. I might even weep for their souls while decorating it. I'd not feel it was a celebration of their lifestyle. I'd see it as my service to the lost. I might even invite them to church.

Jesus was a carpenter. It wouldn't be unimaginable to think that at some point the Romans contracted Him to make crosses.

Remember when being a Christian was more than being political? More than a protest, an outrage, a social agenda? Why do Christian business owners choose to identify their businesses as "Christian"? It used to be to express their desire to serve the community with excellence, tenderness, and grace. Now, it's almost like the business is merely a means to serve self and one's politics. We're actually allowing our politics to become our religion.

If a Muslim or Jewish baker did the same, I'd feel the same. A cake celebrating pork? It's not pork. It's just a cake. They are paying for the expression, they will own it, not the baker. It's not being made as a favor, or on account of the baker's desire in any way. It's business. If a baker doesn't want to make a cake with a swine on it, limit designs, no specialty cakes. If a baker doesn't want to make a cake for a sinful weddings, they can choose not to do any wedding cakes. One can stick to convictions without descrimination.

Where does it end? A medic refusing to do CPR on a gay man because such are worthy of death?

We're a society. We're America. There has to be some measure of common sense and civility, or our society will only continue to fracture until we crumble into civil chaos.