Anti LGBT Mindset: Why are YOU against gay rights? READ MOD WARNING IN OP BEFORE POST

How so? I don't feel oppressed or bullied by gays... do you? Gays have been oppressed in this country for a couple hundred years now, so its funny that you now declare that they are the oppressors. If this is about businesses denying service to gays, and gays suing then I say that a business is not a religion thus it is not protected by the 1st Amendment and is subject to the laws of the State which must stand up to a Constitutional challenge.

 

You are free to speak, practice your religion, peaceable assemble, and so forth. Explain how gays getting married equals the state forbidding you the freedom to practice your religion.

 

I'm an atheist. I oppose gays because they are part of the leftist coalition. However, I think poorly of bullies, and that's what gays have become. In an effort to normalize their status gays are attempting to force religious people to do things which violate their religious beliefs.

 

April 20th must be a big day for you and your wife huh?

 

Oh, look. We've got our very own PF Shia-Sunni war.

 

Oh, Bull crap. 10,000 gay wedding and one lawsuit over a cake. There have been far more hetrosexual lawsuits over refusal of service than from gay people.

And conservatives claim gay people are theatrical - when it comes to histrionics, conservatives are going for the Oscar.

 

Christians and Muslims follow faiths which explicitly characterize homosexuality as morally wrong. By attempting to have Christian and Muslim bakers create cakes celebrating homosexual unions the gays are forcing those bakers to participate in something they believe to be morally wrong. To the extent gays use the courts to compel participation or penalize non-participation they are using the apparatus of govt. to circumscribe the Free Exercise of Religion guaranteed by the First Amendment.

The real goal of the homosexual community is to drive Christians and Muslims out of the arena of public ideas in the same way the Chinese Communist Party has driven Christians and Muslims out of the arena of public ideas in China. The US Govt. and the Chinese Communist Party are becoming more and more like each other as time passes.

- - - Updated - - -

Let homosexual weddings go on, but leave Christian and Muslim shopkeepers alone. Let them act according to their religious beliefs. That is what tolerance is.

 

And obviously, since there have been over 10,000 gay weddings and just a couple of lawsuits over refusal of service - that's what is happening.

There have been far more lawsuits by hetrosexual couples over refusal of service - so unless you are comfortable with hypocrisy, or you just want to go with the Martyred Christian Syndrome, then try to get real about calling gay people, "bullies."

My god, one gay person demanding a cake is hardly the end of the Christian World. Put on your big boy pants and move on.

 

What did you think about the sit ins at the Greensboro Woolworth's lunch counter?

It seems to me that discrimination in the commons should either be allowed or not allowed. And, I really don't understand the idea of allowing it. The commons belongs to us all - regardless of color, gender, etc.

I suspect some would like to let this case slip by as there aren't as many ready to press the issue.

 

Gays compel nothing as the courts are bound by existing law which must stand up to a Constitutional challenge. Again a business is not a religion thus it is not protected by the 1st Amendment and is subject to the laws of the State.

To speak for a group that you are not a part of is to speak from a position of ignorance.

 

That would be tolerating intolerance. Tolerance would be Christians loving thy neighbor as thyself and serving gay customers. How about judge not lest thee be judged?!

 

You oppose the existence of people because you don't like their politics? All I want is to exist in this country as an equal citizen. Because I'm gay, and you oppose gays meaning me, you oppose existing in the country as an equal citizen.

I'm okay with you opposing the politics of lgbt social groups, I oppose many of them. But by stating you oppose gays and not politics, you oppose my existence. Such a position absolutely must not be tolerated.

Yes I'm intolerant to people that oppose my existence. Everyone should be.

Once again gay isn't a political faction it is a sexual orientation. I'm gay and I have never bullied anybody. So that statement is a lie.

I've never forced anybody to violate their religion, and since I'm included in " the gays" I know for a fact that statement is a lie as well.

Some religious people are bullies I don't say all of them are.

And to address your argument. People aren't betting forced to violate their religion, they are being forced out of business by their religion. If your religion demands you not sell products and services to gay people, and people aren't prohibited from being gay, it seems like it's your problem. If I want to sell liquor I don't join the Mormon church. If I want to eat bacon every day I don't adhere strictly to kosher or halal rules.

Some people join religions that forbid them from partaking in various parts of life. It isn't up to the government to set up special rights and privileges for various religions. They just don't interfere. As of yet I haven't seen them interfere with the free exercise of religion.

I see people twisting civil issues into that, but, they aren't interfering with the free exercise of religion.

 

If baking and selling a cake it's morally wrong, they are in the wrong business. They aren't being forced, they chose to be bakers.

So I fail to see the force. I am willing to listen to you explain it.

I think it's wrong for people to sue others for denying them service. But it isn't illegal. And again if baking cakes violates your religion, I'm sorry.

The goal of many religious people is to drive homosexuality back into the closet and deny homosexuals rights. People who want to eliminate people from existence are far worse than people who want to eliminate ideas that people shouldn't exist because of what they are.

Some religious people are trying to turn this country into a theocratic monarchy.

If all the anti gay Christians just decided that the government doesn't need to enforce their religion this world be over tomorrow.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree leave them alone. If they don't want to serve me, I'll just go somewhere else. I know this may be hard to believe, but I can't control other people, even if they are gay. I lack that ability.

All citizens in the United states have the right to sue. If you start making rules that say anybody can sue anybody unless you are gay and you want to sue a religious person, that is making special rights.

I'd be more than willing to discuss reforming the law that says you can sue anybody for any reason, I figure you and I will see eye to eye in that discussion. But as long as you accuse me of being a bully or a communist because off my sexual orientation, I'm going to explain how you are wrong.

 

The lgbt community is making examples of the bakery and pizza parlor in order to stand as warnings to anyone who refuses to be silenced.

 

And who are members of this LGBT community and who is their leader? Since you like painting with a broad brush can we also include anyone elses actions as including you as well? I mean since you are part of SOMEONE'S community after all.

Keep trying to play a victim card, your comments are more and more idiotic each time you do.

 

What do the Bible and the Quran say about race? Nothing. Thus, the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment is not triggered and the State can use the Interstate Commerce Clause to establish equality.

What do the Bible and the Quran say about homosexuality? Morally wrong. Thus, the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment is triggered. In this context, use of the Interstate Commerce Clause and the Equal Protection Clause abridges the Free Exercise Clause.

Equality can be compelled unless it violates another constitutional right, but not otherwise.

People who live in fear aren't prepared to press the issue.

 

No they aren't. ONE couple is angry at the baker - and it hit the internet so supporters - many of them not gay - have piled in. Then the Conservatives piled in and the baker got more than enough money to cover his troubles.

If you look at who has used the social media to condemn the pizza place and the baker, you would find it came mostly from young, non-gay activists and corporations.

Again - this is hardly the end of Christianity as we know it.

When mixed race hetrosexual couples were in the fight to get discrimination laws changed, they also had to file some lawsuits before things quieted down. The same, "It's against my religion to serve mixed race," arguments were made back then. It will pass. In ten years, nobody will think twice about it except the truly hard-core bigots.

10,000 gay weddings - no problems.

 

No, we don't make laws for sin.

We don't have laws on more than half the 10C, even though most view more than that as moral requirements.

We don't have laws on the "7 deadly sins", even though most are viewed as important moral precepts.

The constitution is in effect REGARDLESS of what is in the bible. We are not a theocracy.

 

Individuals conduct business in many forms. Don't elevate form over substance. We know that the First Amendment applies to corporations for purposes of freedom of speech. There is no reason a small business used merely as a method for a few individuals to do business should not be seen as a collection of believing individuals when that is the case.

Further, a believer believes that God is eternal and infinite. In this context all govts. are ephemeral and temporary at best.

We are all ignorant. That should be apparent to everyone.

 

Perhaps, perhaps not. In any event the first and fourteenth amendments are in conflict, and a constitutional crisis exists in the hearts of believers. For a believer, God trumps Govt.

Neither the Bible nor the Quran tolerate sin.

 

I don't have a problem with homosexuals and others on a moral basis. Their decisions are theirs to make. However, when any group is politically monolithic and is part of the enemy coalition that is my ideological enemy, that group should expect harsh treatment. It is perfectly acceptable to be intolerant of opposing ideas.

I guess I'm sort of like Saul Alinsky. I see no need for fairness to my ideological enemies.

I don't oppose gays on moral grounds. I oppose gays because they are part of the enemy host. There is no need for tolerance on either side. In fact, there is no need for the USA to exist any longer.

Good. The greater the animosity the weaker the weaker the USA becomes.

I understand your emotions and your logic. You want to build something. Your problem is that it's much easier to destroy than to build. And I have concluded there is no reason for the country you desire to exist.

 

If they believe God trumps government then they are going to have to learn to live with disappointment or they can find some theocracy to live in.

Not all Americans are believers - and there are Christians Americans who are more tolerant (running about 60% approval of gay marriage last I looked).

Edit - just saw your last post.

God really, really hates trolls. More than anything. And Americans hate religious nuts more than God hates trolls.

 

Lgbt folks are part of the leftist coalition.

There aren't currently many people like me. But there will be. The political coalition to which members of the lgbt community belong seeks to create a new social order with a new set of winners and losers. There is no reason for the new losers to support the existence of this new social order. The new America will be riven with division and strife. It will be a very unhappy place.

My comments were poignant enough to elicit a response from you. I'm not a victim. I'm more like Saul Alinsky.

 

There is a third alternative. Speaking metaphorically, they can go down to the hold of the ship and open all of the kingston valves.

Haven't you read de Tocqueville on the poison called factionalism?

 

Rules for Radicals wasn't dedicated to God was it? I'm an atheist, and a post-American who doesn't fear dialogue.