Indiana....

So hypothetical example...

Straight father goes into bakery to get a wedding cake made for his lesbian daughter's wedding. The father is paying for the whole thing. The baker refuses to the service. Is he discriminating against this straight man now?
 
sturg33 said:
So hypothetical example...

Straight father goes into bakery to get a wedding cake made for his lesbian daughter's wedding. The father is paying for the whole thing. The baker refuses to the service. Is he discriminating against this straight man now?
Click to expand...

Yes. If his reasoning is he doesn't want ot serve a homosexual wedding.
 
57Brave said:
In 1976, the General Convention of the Episcopal Church declared that “homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church" (1976-A069 (link is external)). Since then, faithful Episcopalians have been working toward a greater understanding and radical inclusion of all of God’s children.

Along the way, The Episcopal Church has garnered a lot of attention, but with the help of organizations such as Integrity USA, the church has continued its work toward full inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Episcopalians. In 2003, the first openly gay bishop was consecrated; in 2009, General Convention resolved that God’s call is open to all; and in 2012, a provisional rite of blessing for same-gender relationships was authorized, and discrimination against transgender persons in the ordination process was officially prohibited.

To our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender brothers and sisters: “The Episcopal Church welcomes you!”

......

Is a Christian that denies service to a person based on sexual orientation more Christian than one who doesn't ?

Where in the texts is it written one sect of Christianity gets to speak for all others ??

I honestly don't know the answer to this question and willing to listen to anyone willing to give it a shot
To my mind, this seems tobe an inter faith squabble with the sectarian population caught in the cross fire
Click to expand...

You frame the issue wrongly. The denial of service is based not on the sexual orientation of the person (the baker will provide a birthday cake service to the gay person). It is based on the activity that is to be promoted (a SSM).

You are wrong to assume that I'm speaking for all others. And mainline denominations have adopted both a liberal theology (and when it denies orthodox Christianity it loses the historical right to be called a Christian church) and a liberal political/social agenda. And they are all in a death spiral.

Mainliners kick-out, push-out conservatives. They are intolerant of the historical and worldwide majority position of churches on the matter of human sexuality.

And I'm not sure why you want to limit this to those who profess the Christian faith. As has been made abundantly clear, there are plenty of others across this nation who hold similar views on SSM, be they Muslim, Jew, or secular atheist.
 
If a business doesn't want my money, I don't want them to have it either.

Here in Oregon we had a gun dealer who was refusing to sell guns to Obama supporters. If I was into guns (and Obama, which I'm not), I'd have gladly taken my business elsewhere, and laughed heartily when the business sinks.

But then, one side of me says, its just food...pizza to be exact....you are baking some people something to eat at a gathering, you get paid. Does that really mean you support gay marriage? Should bakeries in San Francisco refuse to make food for Seahawks fans? Jesus treated the people that everyone else hated with love and compassion, sin or no sin.

I work at a Catholic hospital. We treat EVERYONE under no condition at all. Drunk, stoned, straight, gay, Christian, Muslim, Wicken, and we do our best to treat EVERYONE with the same amount of care, compassion, and consideration. Does that mean we support Wicken? No, but we'll feed them when they are hungry. Apples to oranges yes, they are different businesses, but how are Christians supposed to encourage new members if they are constantly finding ways to push their own people out?

It's a troubling subject. I have many gay friends who I respect very much. I love them for who they are, not necessarily support everything they do. Trouble is, I have a difficult time judging what I simply can't relate to.
 
mossy said:
If a business doesn't want my money, I don't want them to have it either.

Here in Oregon we had a gun dealer who was refusing to sell guns to Obama supporters. If I was into guns (and Obama, which I'm not), I'd have gladly taken my business elsewhere, and laughed heartily when the business sinks.

But then, one side of me says, its just food...pizza to be exact....you are baking some people something to eat at a gathering, you get paid. Does that really mean you support gay marriage? Should bakeries in San Francisco refuse to make food for Seahawks fans? Jesus treated the people that everyone else hated with love and compassion, sin or no sin.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they should or shouldn't...

But I am saying they should not be forced one way or the other
 
mossy said:
If a business doesn't want my money, I don't want them to have it either.

Here in Oregon we had a gun dealer who was refusing to sell guns to Obama supporters. If I was into guns (and Obama, which I'm not), I'd have gladly taken my business elsewhere, and laughed heartily when the business sinks.

But then, one side of me says, its just food...pizza to be exact....you are baking some people something to eat at a gathering, you get paid. Does that really mean you support gay marriage? Should bakeries in San Francisco refuse to make food for Seahawks fans? Jesus treated the people that everyone else hated with love and compassion, sin or no sin.

I work at a Catholic hospital. We treat EVERYONE under no condition at all. Drunk, stoned, straight, gay, Christian, Muslim, Wicken, and we do our best to treat EVERYONE with the same amount of care, compassion, and consideration. Does that mean we support Wicken? No, but we'll feed them when they are hungry. Apples to oranges yes, they are different businesses, but how are Christians supposed to encourage new members if they are constantly finding ways to push their own people out?

It's a troubling subject. I have many gay friends who I respect very much. I love them for who they are, not necessarily support everything they do. Trouble is, I have a difficult time judging what I simply can't relate to.
Click to expand...

Did you read the DeYoung article I posted earlier mossy? The one that actually addresses your points here?
 
This one mossy:

BedellBrave said:
And one more:

"Why might a Christian refuse to attend, cater, or participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony?

Just to keep the question on track, let’s set aside two related issues. First, we are not talking about whether Christians should have the right to refuse to participate in a gay wedding without facing government fines and coercion. If the CEO of Apple can keep conservative faith-based apps out of the App Store, then conservative Christians should not be forced into gay weddings with cakes and flowers. But that’s not the issue at hand. Second, for simplicity sake let’s assume this is a discussion among traditional Christians who believe–as the church has always believed and as most of the global church still believes–that same-sex sexual behavior is sinfuland that marriage is a covenantal and conjugal union between a man and a woman.

With those two clarifying comments we can address our question head-on: Why would a Christian feel conscience bound to not be a part of a gay wedding?

It’s a reasonable question, and I hope those asking it are willing to be reasonable in thoughtfully considering a conservative response. It’s not because of bigotry or fear or because we are unaware that Jesus spent time with sinners that leads us to our conclusion. It’s because of our desire to be obedient to Christ and because of the nature of the wedding event itself.

A wedding ceremony, in the Christian tradition, is first of all a worship service. So if the union being celebrated in the service cannot be biblically sanctioned as a an act of worship, we believe the service lends credence to a lie. We cannot come in good conscience and participate in a service of false worship. I understand that sounds not very nice, but the conclusion follows from the premise; namely, that the “marriage” being celebrated is not in fact a marriage and should not be celebrated.

Moreover, there has long been an understanding that those present at a marriage ceremony are not just casual observers, but are witnesses granting their approval and support for the vows that are to be made. That’s why the traditional language speaks of gathering “here in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation.” That’s why one of the sample marriage services in the PCA still has the minister say, “If any man can show just cause why they may not lawfully be wedded, let him now declare it, or else hereafter forever hold his peace.” Quite explicitly, the wedding is not a party for friends and family. It’s not a mere ceremonial formality. It is a divine event in which those gathered celebrate and honor the “solemnization of matrimony.” Which is why–as much as I might want to build bridges with a lesbian friend or reassure a gay family member that I care for him and want to have a relationship with him–I would not attend a same-sex wedding ceremony. I cannot help with my cake, with my flowers, or with my presence to solemnize what is not holy.

But Jesus hung out with sinners! He wasn’t worried about being contaminated by the world. He didn’t want to turn people off to God’s love. He was always throwing open the floodgates of God’s mercy. He would say to us, “If someone forces you to bake one cake, bake for him two!” Okay, let’s think this through. I mean actually think for a few sentences, and not just with slogans and vague sentimentality.

“But Jesus hung out with sinners.” True, sort of (depends on what you mean by “hung out). But Jesus believed marriage was between a man a woman (Matt. 19:3-9). The example of Christ in the Gospels teaches us that we should not be afraid to spend time with sinners. If a gay couple next door invites you over for dinner, don’t turn them down.

“He wasn’t worried about being contaminated by the world.” That’s not the concern here. This isn’t about cooties or sin germs. We have plenty of those ourselves.

“He didn’t want to turn people off to God’s love.” Perhaps, but Jesus did so all the time. He acted in ways that could be unintentionally, and more often deliberately, antagonistic (Matt. 7:6; 13-27; 11:20-24; 13:10-17; 19:16-30; 23:1-36). The fact of the matter is Jesus turned people off all the time. This is no excuse for us to be unthinking and unkind. But it should put to rest the thoroughly unbiblical notion that says if someone feels hurt by your words or unloved by your actions that you were ipso facto sinfully and foolishly unloving.

“He was always throwing open the floodgates of God’s mercy.” Amen. Let’s keep preaching Christ and preach as he did, calling all people to “repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:15).

“If someone forces to you bake one cake, bake for him two!” This is, of course, a true and beautiful principle about how Christians, when reviled, must not revile in return. But it hardly can mean that we do whatever people demand of us, no matter our rights (Acts 16:35-40;22:22-29) and no matter what is right in God’s eyes (Acts 4:18-20).

A wedding is not a dinner invitation or a graduation open house or retirement party. Even in a completely secular environment, there is still a sense–and sometimes the wedding invitations say as much–that our presence at the event would honor the couple and their marriage. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to attend a wedding (let alone cater it or provide the culinary centerpiece) without your presence communicating celebration and support for what is taking place. And, as painful as it may be for us and for those we love, celebrating and supporting homosexual unions is not something God or his word will allow us to do."

Link
Click to expand...
 
sturg33 said:
I'm not saying they should or shouldn't...

But I am saying they should not be forced one way or the other
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, wasn't calling out anyone specifically, just sharing a few thoughts.

I'm troubled about businesses being forced to do something as well. Next stop, you are forced to accept my beliefs in church. We will then force classes about homosexuality in elementary school.

You can be anything you want in this great big world. But if you are a Christian holding up your religious doctrine laid out in the Bible, you are a fair target for anyone's sharp criticism. Nobody will force a Muslim to sell pork (unless they are employed at Costco), just imagine the outcry.
 
mossy said:
If a business doesn't want my money, I don't want them to have it either.

Here in Oregon we had a gun dealer who was refusing to sell guns to Obama supporters. If I was into guns (and Obama, which I'm not), I'd have gladly taken my business elsewhere, and laughed heartily when the business sinks.

But then, one side of me says, its just food...pizza to be exact....you are baking some people something to eat at a gathering, you get paid. Does that really mean you support gay marriage? Should bakeries in San Francisco refuse to make food for Seahawks fans? Jesus treated the people that everyone else hated with love and compassion, sin or no sin.

I work at a Catholic hospital. We treat EVERYONE under no condition at all. Drunk, stoned, straight, gay, Christian, Muslim, Wicken, and we do our best to treat EVERYONE with the same amount of care, compassion, and consideration. Does that mean we support Wicken? No, but we'll feed them when they are hungry. Apples to oranges yes, they are different businesses, but how are Christians supposed to encourage new members if they are constantly finding ways to push their own people out?

It's a troubling subject. I have many gay friends who I respect very much. I love them for who they are, not necessarily support everything they do. Trouble is, I have a difficult time judging what I simply can't relate to.
Click to expand...

The gay coming into the hospital isn't asking you to condone what you think is a sinful activity, he is asking for healing. A lesbian that is asking for a cup of water or a meal, isn't asking for you to condone, approve, or celebrate what you deem to be a sinful activity. They need nourishment. The SSM is a different point, and what people here and throughout this land are advocating is that the purported right of the gay person, who could buy his cake elsewhere, trumps the religious conviction of the baker and that baker must be forced to provide the service or get out of the business. Is that what you are for?
 
mossy said:
Nobody will force a Muslim to sell pork (unless they are employed at Costco), just imagine the outcry.
Click to expand...

Someone should make a scrapbook of the terrible analogies that have been used to attempt to compare to not providing your service equally.
 
Isn't the first step of grieving denial -- point being this wedge issue battle of the culture war is in it's last phases.

Some have been talking about this baker since Brietbart or RedState first poised the O'Keefeian possibility.

thus a manufactured issue.

This is why the baker will have to put the two queers on the wedding cake:

"The new survey found that 59% of Americans support allowing same-sex marriage, nearly double the 30% support reported in 2004."

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/...marriage-hits-all-time-high-wsjnbc-news-poll/

Wall Street Journal -- not the Daily Worker
 
from the above article

However, the issue still poses some risk to GOP candidates facing a spirited presidential primary. Among core Republican voters — the party’s most committed followers — opposition is far stronger, with only 29% saying they support gay marriage.

.......................

Which is probably the real story- the (R) primary
 
Given the WSJ numbers above -- should "Dr" Paul get the nomination -- what do you see as his stance vs a (D) opponent
 
The numbers growth of sam proponents is probably due to fear of getting their house burned down if they say otherwise... you know - from all those tolerant, non-hateful folks
 
57Brave said:
I recall you drawing a "wedding cake baker" scenario over a year ago.

Do I remember correctly?
Click to expand...

I know these people probably deserve to have the government step in an smack them a good one, but I just really prefer the Rosa Parks approach to this. People from all walks of life are getting way too used to the government solving their problems for them. Now there are some areas where the government pretty much has to be the "referee" but in this sort of situation I think a good old fashioned boycott would work best and it would also sorta force more regular people to take ownership in what's going on in their country. This sort of thing (good ole fashioned major league level boycott) could do a LOT of good things in this country. I wish we had more of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top