Religious Freedom Bill in Indiana. - Page 13

Boreas · #**121** 04-02-2015, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell

So, who's being mistreated: an individual who is asked to take their business someplace else - which a business owner has the right to - or a business owner who is asked to subordinate their sincerely held religious views an act in a way that is against those views and against their conscience?

Yes, a person refused public accommodation on the basis of their sexual orientation, and not any current disruptive behavior, is being mistreated.

Since, in your opinion, this doesn't constitute mistreatment, would you say the same thing if the person asked to leave was asked because he was black? Or Muslim? Or Atheist? If so, why? If not, why not"

There is no guarantee in the Constitution covering anyone's right to infringe upon the rights of others, not one thing and certainly not on the basis of religion. We are free to believe as we choose but not to act as we choose, even in accordance with our religious beliefs.

whell · #**122** 04-02-2015, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobabode

Funny, the Indiana legislature seems to disagree with your specious argument. Must suck to be you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/p...m-law/?hpid=z5

I'm supposed to be surprised that a bunch of weak kneed politicos haven't got the courage of their convictions? Sucks to be you that you'd think this is news worthy.

bobabode · #**123** 04-02-2015, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boreas

Yes, a person refused public accommodation on the basis of their sexual orientation, and not any current disruptive behavior, is being mistreated.

Since, in your opinion, this doesn't constitute mistreatment, would you say the same thing if the person asked to leave was asked because he was black? Or Muslim? Or Atheist? If so, why? If not, why not"

There is no guarantee in the Constitution covering anyone's right to infringe upon the rights of others, not one thing and certainly not on the basis of religion. We are free to believe as we choose but not to act as we choose, even in accordance with our religious beliefs.

There it is.

bobabode · #**124** 04-02-2015, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell

I'm supposed to be surprised that a bunch of weak kneed politicos haven't got the courage of their convictions? Sucks to be you that you'd think this is news worthy.

You're adorable when you get all wound up over nothing, for a narrow minded bigot.

I dare you to print this thread out and take it into the confessional. Grow up and learn to be a real Christian, bro.

donquixote99 · #**125** 04-02-2015, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell

I guess you're still living in the slavery era I guess.

The point of mentioning when they were published is so you couldn't claim they were not authentic.

I can give you pro-segregation stuff like that from the 50's, or anti-gay stuff from RIGHT NOW. Do you honestly doubt it?

Religion has always been used to justify bigotry.

finnbow · #**126** 04-02-2015, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell

I'm supposed to be surprised that a bunch of weak kneed politicos haven't got the courage of their convictions? Sucks to be you that you'd think this is news worthy.

They have no courage of their convictions because their attempt to accommodate discrimination against gays through vague language was exposed for the bigoted idiocy that it was. They deserve to skulk out with their tails between their legs.

whell · #**127** 04-02-2015, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boreas

We are free to believe as we choose but not to act as we choose, even in accordance with our religious beliefs.

BULL SHIT.

If I believe that killing is not moral, I can ACT in accordance with those beliefs and choose not to serve in the military, even when and if such objections are on religious grounds. I can even avoid the draft. The government can't force me to over-ride my religious beliefs or my conscience and force me to act in a way that is objectionable to me.

Therefore, if I firmly believe that marriage is only between a man and a woman, should the government be able to force me to ACT in a manner that is inconsistent with my beliefs and force me and my business to support that marriage ceremony in any way? Sounds like your answer to that question is a resounding yes. If that's the case, maybe you're not just a religious intolerant. Maybe you're just a good old fashioned fascist.

donquixote99 · #**128** 04-02-2015, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell

I love how you can have a laser like focus on the ill-founded writings of a few, yet ignore how the Christian churches and Christians played a huge role in the abolitionist movement. Do you to wear your religious bigotry and intolerance like a badge of honor?

If I ever said 'all Christians are bigots' that would indeed be a bigoted thing to say. But I haven't said that. I know about the Christian abolutionists, of course, and have great respect for them. Your accusation, as usual, is dishonest bullshit.

I just say that some Christians use their religion to justify bigotry, and they are behind this anti-gay push.

bobabode · #**129** 04-02-2015, 04:52 PM

WWTPS? What would the Pope say?

Oh, wait...

whell · #**130** 04-02-2015, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The point of mentioning when they were published is so you couldn't claim they were not authentic.

I can give you pro-segregation stuff like that from the 50's, or anti-gay stuff from RIGHT NOW. Do you honestly doubt it?

Religion has always been used to justify bigotry.

You would equate a sincerely held objection to a gay lifestyle to being "anti-gay", which is disingenuous as hell, just like you'd overlook the the contributions of religious individuals to abolition and civil rights advances. So you've made your idiotic opinions quite clear, RIGHT NOW.