Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Homosexuality and Evo, Creo, and ID
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 301 of 1309 (727281)
05-17-2014 1:35 AM
Reply to: Message 300 by Omnivorous
05-16-2014 5:45 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
No. Nobody has any business judging anybody's sin or what they want your services for unless you happen to know they are planning something criminal, this isn't hypocrisy this is just life.
To answer your question, I'd say I would refuse to decorate a cake with a white supremacist slogan, but I wouldn't refuse to sell a cake to a white supremacist, who could take the "25 Wonderful Years!" cake to the party celebrating an anniversary of his particular pocket of nasty--
But neither would the Christian baker. Why aren't you getting this point?
Your idea that there's some kind of pretense involved in simply minding my own business, as in hiding behind a "cloak of ignorance," would mean nobody could live at all in this world, we'd all have to become obnoxious busybodies. I don't need to know everything about other people's business. If I'm not writing the inscription on the cake they can do whatever they want with it, it's none of my business.
The issue I'm talking about comes up ONLY when someone requires ME, me personally, to do something that actively and consciously violates my conscience or my moral standards.
ABE: Missing my own point: The point isn't sin and sinners as such, it isn't homosexuality as such or any kind of sin as such, in the bakery case: it's specifically the issue of gay marriage and their forcing the baker implicitly to validate it by specifically making a special wedding cake for it. That's been the context all along and over and over I've said that there is no problem with doing ordinary business with gays or anybody. '
I really don't see why this is so hard to understand. Just as you don't care what a white supremacist does with a generic cake, neither does the Christian baker care what a gay person does with a generic cake.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 300 by Omnivorous, posted 05-16-2014 5:45 PM Omnivorous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 302 by Larni, posted 05-17-2014 7:20 AM Faith has replied
 Message 306 by ringo, posted 05-17-2014 1:06 PM Faith has replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 302 of 1309 (727286)
05-17-2014 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 301 by Faith
05-17-2014 1:35 AM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
The issue I'm talking about comes up ONLY when someone requires ME, me personally, to do something that actively and consciously violates my conscience or my moral standards.
But it is the law and you have to obey it.
Romans 13:1-2 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
How is this different from a member of NAMBLA refusing to obey the law because it conflicts with what he feels is moral?

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 301 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 1:35 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 303 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 11:41 AM Larni has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 303 of 1309 (727306)
05-17-2014 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 302 by Larni
05-17-2014 7:20 AM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
But it is the law and you have to obey it.
No I do not. Laws that directly oppose God are not to be obeyed. All this is going to do is persecute decent people, probably eventually send them to prison. But that's the way the country is going.
Romans 13:1-2 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
No, I do not have to be subject to laws that contradict God's word.
How is this different from a member of NAMBLA refusing to obey the law because it conflicts with what he feels is moral?
Well, you can decide between us if you want. There may be some here who would put NAMBLA above Christians.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 302 by Larni, posted 05-17-2014 7:20 AM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by RAZD, posted 05-17-2014 12:18 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 305 by PaulK, posted 05-17-2014 12:22 PM Faith has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 304 of 1309 (727325)
05-17-2014 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 303 by Faith
05-17-2014 11:41 AM


no "get out of jail free" card here
If you are charged and prosecuted for breaking a law, you are not being persecuted because you chose to break the law.
You are free to decide to break any law you wish, but you are responsible for the consequences of your behavior: you are choosing lawful punishment in lieu of abiding by the law.
Fully commited protesters understand this - you can see people making this choice protesting the XL pipeline for example.
Claiming religious belief is not a "get out of jail free" card.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 11:41 AM Faith has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 305 of 1309 (727326)
05-17-2014 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 303 by Faith
05-17-2014 11:41 AM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
quote:
No I do not. Laws that directly oppose God are not to be obeyed
And how does this law "oppose God" ?
quote:
All this is going to do is persecute decent people, probably eventually send them to prison. But that's the way the country is going
Decent people wouldn't be breaking that law in the first place.
quote:
Romans 13:1-2 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
No, I do not have to be subject to laws that contradict God's word.
The verses you quoted say that if you go against the secular law, you are going against God. You really should try to read the Bible more. Preferably a translation in a more modern English that you might find easier to understand.
Romans 13 NASB
Be Subject to Government
13 Every (a)person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except (b)from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore (c)whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for (d)good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5 Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. 7 Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
Footnotes:
a. Romans 13:1 Or soul
b. Romans 13:1 Lit by
c. Romans 13:2 Lit he who
d. Romans 13:3 Lit good work
Seems pretty clear. You should obey the government, and the government has the right to punish evil. So I guess that any real Christian would happily obey this law.
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 11:41 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 311 by Larni, posted 05-17-2014 3:45 PM PaulK has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 306 of 1309 (727334)
05-17-2014 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 301 by Faith
05-17-2014 1:35 AM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
Faith writes:
The issue I'm talking about comes up ONLY when someone requires ME, me personally, to do something that actively and consciously violates my conscience or my moral standards.
I don't see why baking a cake should violate anybody's conscience.
Would it be reasonable for a sales clerk at The Gap to refuse to sell socks to either of the grooms?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 301 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 1:35 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 307 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 1:31 PM ringo has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 307 of 1309 (727339)
05-17-2014 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 306 by ringo
05-17-2014 1:06 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
I don't see why baking a cake should violate anybody's conscience.
Such a simple thing, such an obvious thing, explained over and over and over. Not "baking a cake," but constructing a special-ordered WEDDING cake for a gay wedding. Like if you were asked to inscribe "White supremacy reigns" on a cake. Would you do it? If not, surely you can see that there are some specific instances where a person's conscience would be forced into a corner by some requests.
Would it be reasonable for a sales clerk at The Gap to refuse to sell socks to either of the grooms?
No. Selling socks doesn't validate gay marriage.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by ringo, posted 05-17-2014 1:06 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 308 by ringo, posted 05-17-2014 3:02 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 309 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-17-2014 3:36 PM Faith has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 308 of 1309 (727345)
05-17-2014 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 307 by Faith
05-17-2014 1:31 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
Faith writes:
Like if you were asked to inscribe "White supremacy reigns" on a cake. Would you do it?
The first thing I would do is check to see if the customer had brown eyes; if he did, I'd tell him he wasn't really white.
Your turn: If you were asked to inscribe "Happy 4.6 billionth birthday, Earth" on a cake, would you do it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 307 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 1:31 PM Faith has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 309 of 1309 (727348)
05-17-2014 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 307 by Faith
05-17-2014 1:31 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
Not "baking a cake," but constructing a special-ordered WEDDING cake for a gay wedding.
Would you/they construct a special-ordered wedding cake for my Catholic wedding?
If so, you're a hypocrite.
If not, then that's unconstitutional and the business should not serve the public.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 307 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 1:31 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 310 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 3:40 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 310 of 1309 (727349)
05-17-2014 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 309 by New Cat's Eye
05-17-2014 3:36 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
Oh I'll be a hypocrite and any other kind of evil thing you can come up with no matter what I say.
The issue is not what church is doing the wedding, but who is getting married. Gay marriage is not acceptable but heterosexual marriage of course is.
I can hardly wait to find out what other totally irrelevant objection can be thought up against me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 309 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-17-2014 3:36 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 312 by PaulK, posted 05-17-2014 3:46 PM Faith has replied
 Message 315 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-17-2014 4:04 PM Faith has replied

Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(3)
Message 311 of 1309 (727350)
05-17-2014 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 305 by PaulK
05-17-2014 12:22 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
What baffles me is that I (a committed atheist), seem to have a better grasp on the intra intricacies of the Bible than an obviously committed xian.
Go figure.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 305 by PaulK, posted 05-17-2014 12:22 PM PaulK has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 312 of 1309 (727351)
05-17-2014 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by Faith
05-17-2014 3:40 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
quote:
Gay marriage is not acceptable but heterosexual marriage of course is.
It seems that Jesus would disagree with the idea that all heterosexual weddings are acceptable. See Mark 10:11-12

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 3:40 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 313 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 3:49 PM PaulK has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 313 of 1309 (727354)
05-17-2014 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 312 by PaulK
05-17-2014 3:46 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
I agree so I would limit the heterosexual weddings too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 312 by PaulK, posted 05-17-2014 3:46 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 4:02 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 319 by PaulK, posted 05-18-2014 4:25 AM Faith has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 314 of 1309 (727356)
05-17-2014 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by Faith
05-17-2014 3:49 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
Actually I think I spoke too soon. The issue here is an overt challenge to the conscience. If I'm asked to make a wedding cake for a heterosexual wedding and have no reason to know whether it is a first or other marriage, I'd have no reason not to make it. That's the principle of minding my own business that I said before rules.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 3:49 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by Larni, posted 05-17-2014 5:29 PM Faith has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 315 of 1309 (727358)
05-17-2014 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by Faith
05-17-2014 3:40 PM


Re: You knew sinners bought cakes when you baked them.
Hypocrite it is, then. The irrelevancies you think you are seeing are a result of you not being able to follow your arguments to their logical conclusion. But you've never been able to do that so I don't think you ever will. Oh well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 3:40 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 316 by Faith, posted 05-17-2014 4:13 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024