Posted on 02/16/2014 6:56:37 PM PST by Carbonsteel
So would I.
I have no use for hypocrites, unfortunately there are many floating around here, including long time members, who refuse to see the obvious contradictions in their push for MORE government.
Quit asking sensible questions! Didn't you get the latest memo? To be "gay" is to flame publicly! It's innate! It's nature!
Some locker rooms have taken to banning cellphone use because some same-sex attracted individuals were filming others in states of undress.
But they have ZERO interest in heterosexual people. Really. No, really...
Business Insider certainly doesn’t seem to be very BUSINESS minded.
true that
One FACT that has silently been swept aside by leftist propagandists is that the term "heterosexual" is an objective scientific term that has to do with how a species procreates (with two sexes) ALL gays with few exceptions are heterosexual (male or female). The subjective self identified mental condition termed 'orientation' has no basis in science as an inherent objective state of being -it is a mental condition.
Disorder is more like it.
Having had some experience with homosexuals, male and female I will differ with you that their ‘sin’ is between them and God. Such could very well be applicable to some homosexuals or transvestites but such does not apply to those who broadcast their persuasions. At least such does not apply to the many who flaunt their character and would make laws that say others must give their legal societal standings up for the benefit of the other persons behavior traits.
It was a girl. But I should have - LOL.
Thanks Carbonsteel.
It would eliminate penalties for businesses that don't want to do business with somebody because of sexual orientation. As long as the customer doesn't put his orientation in the business guy's face, it would not turn up as an issue.
I wouldn't. There would be lots of alternates.
Plus, if a gay baker felt that strongly against heterosexuals, would you WANT him preparing food for you?
Orthodox (small "o") religious people who opposed segregation and jim crow laws thought they were critiquing human law with G-d's law. What we now find out is that the civil rights fight has been used to label religious law as reactionary and oppressive and to attribute the end of segregation to the overthrow of religious law by secular law.
There's just one problem: there is no such thing as secular morality, and, ultimately, secular law. Just as Jews need to drop Thomas Jefferson and begin invoking G-d to defend themselves and Israel from anti-Semitism, all religious people need to stop invoking Jefferson and the language of "rights" and "liberty" and remind the world that only Divine Law is objective. All secular law, no matter how rational or utilitarian, is ultimately subjective and arbitrary.
Bring G-d in from the "religion" ghetto. Make G-d public!
That was not my point.
I think I know your point, and I disagree. I don’t think most FReepers would be upset over a gay baker refusing to serve a hetero wedding.
That one statement is loaded with potential abuse and misapplication, because homosexuals will construe ANY disapproval of their lifestyle as "abuse." They incessantly say that the mere questioning of what they do leads to people abusing them. They must have hearty, open, effusive adulation, or we are "persecuting" them otherwise.
That wasn't my point, either.
My point had to do with government involvement and how it is how it is often applauded around here when it suits, yet lambasted at other times - even when it is the identical type government involvement.
this issue is forced participation.
A business owner can not be forced to participate in the condoning of a recreational sex act.
This is no different than that key west hotel that refused service to a normal couple.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.