Openly gay New York Democrats oppose plan to open Chick-fil-A restaurants along I-90

This is not the same as, "if child is born while couple is married the father AUTOMATICALLY assumes responsibility for fatherhood." I read this as, the father ACCEPTS responsibility for fatherhood.

 

"Yahweh is the name of the state god of the ancient Kingdom of Israel." https://www.worldhistory.org/Yahweh/

 

All of the bakers in these situations are happy to serve ALL races and ALL genders. They are just not able to use their artistic,
creative expression to create art if it's to be used as part of something with which they disagree.

 

Spiritual, as in good and evil?

 

Which race would it be discriminating against?

 

Father is FORCED to accept responsibility by the government.
It is a regulation of behavior for heterosocial couples.

There is absolutely no regulation for homosexual couples ONLY BENEFITS.

 

I think you are pretending that you do not understand.
Yes for homosexual couples marriage is a collection of benefits.
For heterosexual couples it is regulatory system.
As you can see couples are not treated the same, so there is no equality.
Without equality gay marriage is a just a special right for homosexual couples without ANY kind of justification.

 

Again people are prosecuted for not supporting homosexual agenda.
Have you heard about lawsuits against the baker who was forced to bake a cake with homosexual agenda?
Homosexual brainwash is everywhere, it is definitely influence people's opinion.

 

link to where it says that in the bible, I linked to where it says God's name is "Jealous" in the bible

 

so then you were wrong in your other post.... saying all they did is sell wedding cakes

 

nope, spiritual as in we all have a life force, a soul, whatever you want to call it

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience." - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

 

the couples race, they would be discriminating based on the race or gender of the couple

 

it's the same for both, not sure what you're trying to say

 

people don't like it when others discriminate based on race or gender

he was told he had to sell the cakes he advertised for sale to anyone regardless of race or gender... he could not discriminate

it was a wedding cake, not a cake with a "homosexual agenda", i would be against forcing a baker to make those, that is not the issue here

 

There was no discrimination whatsoever.
He did not refuse to sell cake, he refused to promote homosexual agenda.
If it is not obvious to you, then there is no point to debate.

 

Homosexuals are not forced to take responsibility for procreation within the scope of marriage, that is a key.

 

Depends upon what one sees as evidence. I've dealt with people who think the Bible is evidence.

 

I sourced that Chick Fil A supports groups that push the anti-LGBT agenda. That proves my point, not yours.

 

You can't seriously study the history of the American West without looking at prostitution.

What do you mean by "teach homosexuality?"

Again, what do you mean by "teach?"

 

That's indeed a wildly popular believe. But it remains an unfounded, unreasonable, backward religiously and foremost a discriminatory believe.

There is no such thing as a homosexual marriage. The only marriage there is, is a marriage for all.

 

Chick-fil-A's President personally supports whatever he wishes. The company is not involved.

 

They're prosecuted for violating laws that give specific protection for himosexuals.

I don't think you're distinguishing between a lawsuit and prosecution.

What is "homosexual brainwash?"

 

The company is involved, since the profits made by the company are used by the OWNER to support who he wishes to support.
And it just is outright dumb to deny this.

 

Is not that what I am saying, special rights for homosexuals that allow prosecute
anyone who disagrees with homosexual agenda.

why don't you google first?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain...ontrolled by certain psychological techniques.

 

Actually, it just is outright American. Any of us is free, as an American, to use our personal earnings to support whatever cause we choose. I own stock in a number of companies; those companies are not parties to any donation decision I make.