Christian Baker In Trouble Again!

[RumTumTugger]

No, the biblical model is for a marriage between a christian man and a christian woman.

Wrong, JimL

Gen 2:24
Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

and also repeated in the new testament

Mat 19:5 “and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?[fn]

and again here

Eph 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”[fn]

Nothing about them being christians at all just that they be man and woman; not man and man or woman and woman.

do not try to teach your grandmother to suck eggs JimL you will only go away with egg on your face.

[rogue06]

No, the biblical model is for a marriage between a christian man and a christian woman.

Facepalm stooges.jpg

[NorrinRadd]

Not so long ago many Christians regarded interracial marriage as running contrary to their Christian beliefs. Some still do. Such persons are not entitled in law to refuse providing a a cake for them or any other law abiding citizens...including homosexuals.

I realize that as an infidel, you are willfully ignorant, and so no matter how many times this is explained, you will stubbornly resist it. Even so:

Fake Analogy. Race is not a matter of behavior. Homosexual practice is. Gender flip-floppery is. The baker refuses to participate in celebrations of vile PRACTICES.

No, it was not to celebrate the "practice of their gayness", it was to celebrate their wedding...this is what wedding cakes are for.

A real wedding celebrates and endorses the union of male and female, IOW normal sexuality. For thousands of years this has been assumed, so it has not been necessary to spell it out. In the degraded world of today, it apparently is now necessary.

“Bullying, harassing weirdo"...really?

Really.

So you are encouraging lying so as to spare the feelings of the homophobic baker?

I'm encouraging the bullying harassing weirdo to stop being a bullying harassing weirdo.

Failing that, I'm encouraging it to keep its stupid mouth shut about the details of the reason for the cake.

No. What "provoked the conflict" was the bakers bigotry. If he wasn't bigoted, he would not have been provoked.

No, if he had no sincere convictions he would not have been provoked.

[Tassman]

I realize that as an infidel, you are willfully ignorant, and so no matter how many times this is explained, you will stubbornly resist it.

Even "infidels" are entitled to their views.

Even so:

Fake Analogy. Race is not a matter of behavior. Homosexual practice is. Gender flip-floppery is.

Yes it is a matter of behaviour if inter-racial people marry...this is contrary to the religious beliefs of some Christians. Just as "Gender flip-floppery", as you so charmingly put it, is to other Christians...although not all by any means.

The baker refuses to participate in celebrations of vile PRACTICES.

The only “vile PRACTICE” here is the baker’s bigotry...and yours

A real wedding celebrates and endorses the union of male and female, IOW normal sexuality. For thousands of years this has been assumed, so it has not been necessary to spell it out. In the degraded world of today, it apparently is now necessary.

What is historically degraded is the willful disregard of homosexuals who, whether you like it or not, exist. The APA regards homosexual behavior as a normal, albeit minority aspect of human sexuality. They are to be respected as fellow citizens, not despised on the basis of crack-pot religious beliefs.

Really. I'm encouraging the bullying harassing weirdo to stop being a bullying harassing weirdo.

So a homosexual is a “bullying harassing weirdo” for asking a cake maker to make a wedding cake. This seems to be a reasonable request to make of a cake-maker don’t you think?

Failing that, I'm encouraging it to keep its stupid mouth shut about the details of the reason for the cake.

So you are telling him to lie.

No, if he had no sincere convictions he would not have been provoked.

Whatever “sincere convictions” anyone has, they are not entitled to discriminate against lawful citizens on the basis of personal prejudices.

[JimL]

Wrong, JimL

Gen 2:24
Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

and also repeated in the new testament

Mat 19:5 “and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?[fn]

and again here

Eph 5:31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.”[fn]

Nothing about them being christians at all just that they be man and woman; not man and man or woman and woman.

do not try to teach your grandmother to suck eggs JimL you will only go away with egg on your face.

The bible doesn't have to say it is about Jews/christians, thats what the entire world view of the scripture is. It is not speaking to "so called heretics.

[RumTumTugger]

The bible doesn't have to say it is about Jews/christians, thats what the entire world view of the scripture is. It is not speaking to "so called heretics.

No JimL you do not get to tell us what our world view is according to the bible since you refuse to accept it as being God's word. biblical marriage is between a man and woman, period. it is not a sin for muslim, hindu etc to marry someone of the opposite sex. it is a sin to act in a way God says is wrong, period.

But enough of this fluff you started trying to derail the true discussion we should be having. do we have rights or not? given that to have such rights this should be the rule,"YOUR rights end where MY rights begin". In other words there is no hierarchy of rights, the minute you start putting ranks to rights you are saying there are no rights.

Did the baker try and stop the gay couple or the transgender person from having their celebrations? NO so he stopped where their right to hold the celebrations began he only took his right not to participate in celebrating what he sincerely holds as a sin the gay couple. No bigotry, as you falsely claim, only non acceptance by the gay couple and transgender person of the baker's right to live out his sincere religious belief. So who is against rights and being bigoted here, not the baker; but you and those who would side with Colorado, the gay couple and the transgender person.

[DesertBerean]

No, the biblical model is for a marriage between a christian man and a christian woman. It has even been argued here that marriage is a christian term not to be defind by others. As for Halloween, Halloween is not a person seer. But again, that is all irrelevant, we have laws preventing the discrimination against people because of who they are which is why black people are now free to attend good schools, have decent jobs, and shop and dine as freely as you and I. Now unfortunately we have to fight conservative haters, bigots and ignorance once again for those same rights to be available to homosexual people.

The biblical model is not just for Christians. It was established long before the Law of Moses, and Jesus confirmed it.

Edited to finish my thought: and, like the faith of Abraham being the basis of his righteousness, not the Law, this makes the institution of marriage a universal principle.

[DesertBerean]

And the REAL issue (which the Supreme Court agreed to) was the blatant persecution and prejudice shown by the State Board that started the whole thing. Their behavior clearly showed to the Court that they were pursuing unconstitutional favoritism and (IIRC) threatened freedom of religion.

[Terraceth]

No JimL you do not get to tell us what our world view is according to the bible since you refuse to accept it as being God's word. biblical marriage is between a man and woman period. it is not a sin to be muslim, hindu etc. it is a sin to act in a way God says is wrong period.

Being a Hindu by definition is violating the First Commandment. How is that not a sin?

[rogue06]

No JimL you do not get to tell us what our world view is according to the bible since you refuse to accept it as being God's word.

Not to mention that whenever he does try he gets things hysterically wrong.

Case in point:

No, the biblical model is for a marriage between a christian man and a christian woman.

[seer]

Being a Hindu by definition is violating the First Commandment. How is that a sin?

What is your point?

[Terraceth]

What is your point?

I misphrased the question. It was supposed to read "how is that not a sin?" It's corrected now.

[seer]

I misphrased the question. It was supposed to read "how is that not a sin?" It's corrected now.

I think Rum's point was that it would not be a sin for a Muslim to marry, though he didn't articulate it well.

[rogue06]

I think Rum's point was that it would not be a sin for a Muslim to marry, though She didn't articulate it well.

FIFY n/c

[RumTumTugger]

I think Rum's point was that it would not be a sin for a Muslim to marry, though he didn't articulate it well.

yes that is exactly what I meant sorry I was not clear about I'd better fix that. and rogue fixed your "misgendering" of me already