The Rev. William Avon Keen, president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Virginia, joined conservative black clergy in launching a campaign Oct. 23, 2017, in support of a Colorado baker who refused to create a cake for a gay wedding. RNS photo by Adelle M. Banks

‘We got your back, Jack,’ conservative black clergy tell baker who refused gay couple

WASHINGTON (RNS) — Conservative African-American clergy accused LGBT activists of hijacking the civil rights movement and launched a campaign to support a Colorado baker who refused to create a cake for a gay wedding.

The Rev. William Avon Keen, president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference of Virginia, told reporters on Monday (Oct. 23) that the civil rights movement’s efforts to gain equal facilities for schooling and health care do not equate with a gay couple’s wedding cake request.

“We had to fight for equal treatment because of the color of our skin,” he said, standing with other black clergy at a news conference held outside the Supreme Court. “Christians should not be forced to support sin.”

Using provocative videos and images, the "We Got Your Back, Jack" campaign's message is that the African-American civil rights struggle and LGBT rights are not comparable, adding to the fierce debate surrounding the case scheduled to be heard by the court on Dec. 5.

One of the images depicts “white” and “colored” water fountains along with an “LGBT” rainbow-colored bubbler — all topped with the words, “One of these never happened.”

The Rev. Dean Nelson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a public policy group mostly comprised of Republicans, said the aim of the campaign is the "support of Jack Phillips and all people of faith and conscience who simply want to live their lives, who simply want the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

[ad number=“1”]

“The government exists to protect those who have diverse opinions and viewpoints, not to punish them,” added Nelson, who also is a senior fellow for African-American affairs at the Family Research Council.

The high court case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, stems from a request in 2012 by David Mullins and Charlie Craig, a Denver gay couple, who wanted a wedding cake from Phillips’ shop. Phillips, the owner, refused, saying baking such a cake would violate his deeply held Christian beliefs.

The couple filed discrimination charges against him and won before the Colorado Civil Rights Commission and in the state courts.

[ad number=“2”]

The clergy were joined by staffers from Alliance Defending Freedom and Family Research Council Action, advocacy groups siding with Phillips, as well as Janet Boynes, founder of a Minneapolis-based ministry that offers “spiritual guidance for those who choose to walk away from homosexuality.”

Boynes, who described herself as an “ex-lesbian,” also objected to activists’ efforts to equate the civil rights and gay rights movements.

“I resent having my race compared to what other people do in bed,” she said. “There is no comparison. It only trivializes racial discrimination.”

Reached after the press conference, the Rev. Cedric Harmon, executive director of Many Voices — a pro-LGBTQ black church movement — rejected the premise of the campaign.

[ad number=“3”]

“As a believer myself and a Christian, I don’t believe that anyone in business should be using their religious beliefs to discriminate against any member of one marginalized community because to do so would open the door to discriminate against all other marginalized communities,” he said.


  1. “As a believer myself and a Christian, I don’t believe that anyone in business should be using their religious beliefs to discriminate against any member of one marginalized community because to do so would open the door to discriminate against all other marginalized communities,”
    It is not discrimination to follow what Christ taught.

    1 Thessalonians 5:22King James Version (KJV)
    22 Abstain from all appearance of evil

  2. Hmmm…let’s see what a Civil Rights veteran has to say about this:

    I fought too long and too hard to end discrimination based on race and color, to not stand up against discrimination against our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” As your representative in Congress, I work daily to combat injustice and fight for equality.

    Human rights, civil rights, these are issues of dignity. Every human being walking this Earth, whether gay, lesbian, straight, or transgender, is entitled to the same rights. It is in keeping with America’s promise of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
    –Congressman John Lewis

  3. Its very sad to see a bigoted black person-it shows their ignorance about their own battles with religious bigotry- only 50 years ago. Little do they know that if religious nonsense is allowed as a reason to discriminate, half of the south will stop serving black people!!!

  4. Lotta civil-rights veterans out there. Here’s another one:

    “Today, we look back with scorn at those who twisted the law to make marriage serve a racist agenda, and I believe our descendants will look back the same way at us, if we yield to the same kind of pressure a radical sexual agenda is placing on us today.

    “Just as it’s distorting the equation of marriage if you press race into it, it’s also distorting if you subtract gender.”

    Bishop Gilbert Thompson, Black Ministerial Alliance, Boston Globe, Feb. 19, 2004.

  5. I totally agree that anti-LGBT discrimination and discrimination based on race is not the same. However, anti-LGBT discrimination is about perceived activities in bed. It also shows that the one discriminating is the one picturing the activities in bed. It is rare that a gay person goes into an establishment and has sex out in the open. (If they did, depending on the establishment, most people would support the owner’s right to ask them to leave). While the systematic discrimination is different, the act is still one in the same. It is sad that a group of people who suffered awful discrimination can’t see the offense when it happens to someone else. This group seems to lack an empathetic gene (kind of like the prez).

  6. If a business can discriminate, then they can discriminate for ANY reason, including race. The same exact argument being used now to justify discrimination against gay people was used back in the day to justify racial discrimination. Many people used the “religious freedom” argument to deny goods and services to black people. They said it was their sincerely held religious belief. Whether you agreed with it or not, the fact is they used that argument in court then just like it’s being used now.

    “We don’t serve your kind” has an inglorious history, and it’s a shame that Evangelicals are embracing it to justify the mistreatment of others. Evangelical Christianity is becoming quite infamous for who it hates. You’d think Evangelicals would be scandalized by that inglorious history, but they’re quite proud to it, going all the way to the Supreme Court with it.

    Well, if the Supreme Court says that one can use their religion to discriminate in the provision of good and services in the marketplace, then I hope it’s used against Evangelical Christians. Maybe when they feel the sting of mistreatment and discrimination in the marketplace they’ll rethink their support of it.

  7. Doesn’t quite work that way.

    There actually is NO issue of “perceptions” at all, because the public, wide-open request for the Christian to participate in a specific gay-marriage-related gig has already been made by the customer, out loud. That request for participation, is THE sole issue. Christians gotta say no.

    We Christians — including we black ones — are merely asking local, state, & federal government to respect our Bill Of Rights religious freedom to say no to participating in the **event**. That’s all.

    For if Gay Goliath gets to repeal the Bill Of Rights for whites, Gay Goliath will automatically repeal it for us blacks.

  8. No one is being asked to ‘participate ‘ in gay weddings.

  9. How quickly people forget that slavery and segregation were defended from a religious standpoint. Still are, in some circles.

  10. ” Evangelical Christianity is becoming quite infamous for who it hates.”

    From where I stand it appears to be consciously choosing to be defined by who it hates. I don’t think that the Jesus of the Sermon-on-the-Mount would appreciate their use of the term “Christian”.

  11. Empty words, if he supports pernicious regulations taking freedom from private business owners in other regards including race. The so-called “civil rights act” was the foundation of the current fascism forcing homosexual affirmation on unwilling business people.

    The CRA was just the new Jim Crow laws.

  12. You get to define “participation?” Says who?

  13. Sounds like your side is defining participation and in a way never seen before.

  14. John Lewis was one of the “Big Six” leaders of the 1960s Civil Rights movement. He was one of the original Freedom Riders, president of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, and helped organize the 1963 March on Washington. Now while I don’t completely discount that Gilbert Thompson did important things during that era, whatever it was didn’t warrant a Google entry after a cursory search.

  15. I will wade in. First, let’s draw a distinction. Being African-American (or European, Asian, or any other race and/or ethnicity) is something we do not choose, and as such all individuals, no matter their race or ethnicity, are entitled to the same liberties as all Americans. It has taken us over 300 years of struggle, and as a society, I am still not sure we have gotten this right. Choosing to participate in homosexual sex is exactly that, the exercise of freedom of choice. We can argue about whether or not someone is born with homosexual orientation. I think the science indicates that the causes of homosexual practice are multiple and not easily reduced to one single explanation. Even then, participation in homosexual activity is something that an individual can choose to do or not to do. So while my libertarian tendencies allow for a wide range of freedom of choice, on this matter those who oppose the practice of homosexuality have every constitutional right not to support activities that encourage it. So we get to the baker who because of his or her religious convictions refuses to bake a wedding cake that depicts the marriage of two men or two women (and you can bet that the cake will have indications of that). That individual is not discriminating against anybody for two reasons. First, because both homosexual practice and objection to homosexual practice are equally protected by the U.S. constitution, especially the first amendment that grants expansive liberty of speech, association, and religion. Second, because, in a free society there is an ample number of bakers who don’t have objections to homosexual practice and are more than happy to bake the cake. Hence, the baker who objects can easily refer someone to another shop that will be happy to bake the cake. And for those of you who think this is simply a matter of a few Christian bakers who should know better, might I suggest you go to a Muslim bakery in Detroit and try to get a cake baked for a gay wedding. A television station tried that a couple of years ago and was turned down at every Muslim bakery they went to. So why don’t you hear about that. Why are those bakers not being sued? Uncomfortable questions arent they.

  16. Does my gun dealer participate in my hunting? Does my tennis stringer participate in my tennis tournament? Does my barber participate in my job interview?

  17. I didn’t know cakes had sexual orientation! Do they have gender or sex or race too?!

  18. You bet wrong. The case going to the Supreme Court did not involve a “depiction” of the marriage of a same-sex couple. In fact, the cake did not have anything on it because not only was it never baked, the cake design was never discussed. The couple walked into the shop, asked for a cake for their wedding, and were refused service. For all the baker knew, they could have been asking for a standard white tiered cake. The gotcha video from the Muslim bakery you’re referring to had a supposed customer asking for “Ben and Steven Forever” to be placed on the cake. Asking for a specific message to be on the cake distinguishes the matter from the case going to the Supreme Court.

  19. yes it is because our laws do not come from and are not on the books to please jesus. we have common law enacted for the social order of the population, generally applicable to the religious and non religious. we are not a theocracy and never will be.

  20. You are dead wrong just from the get go. It is not about sex at all, but identity.

    Two guys, both completely heterosexual, not interested in gay sex, totally not wanting gay sex, repulsed by gay sex, can get married if they so choose.

    Your aregument falls apart on that basis. It falls apart on basis of FREEDOM FROM DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF. Your religion is completely a choice. You can change your religion as often as you change your underwear, and you are STILL protected from discrimination.

    But the best part: it always gets back to “at least we’re not as bad as the Muslims!”

    And isn’t that an indictment of the first water?

  21. “We have never held that an individual’s religious beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that the State is free to regulate….The mere possession of religious convictions which contradict the relevant concerns of a political society does not relieve the citizen from the discharge of political responsibilities. We first had occasion to assert that principle in Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1879), where we rejected the claim that criminal laws against polygamy could not be constitutionally applied to those whose religion commanded the practice. “Laws,” we said, “are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. . . . Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself….”

    Justice Scalia

  22. As opposed to the Jim Fairy laws, where you could get kicked out of the military for saying you’re gay, or fired from your job, or arrested for committing exactly the same acts as a man and a woman.

  23. No. But they sure seem to like oral sex. “Open wide. Honey. I’m coming in.”

  24. Actually, all laws came from Christ.
    Secondly, a Christian shuns the appearance of evil.

  25. Not true. What about the people allowed to not go to war?

  26. no it’s sex and Christ called it, “unnatural” and “shameless acts” A Christian has been told not to support things of that nature.

  27. And the ending of american slavery began with Christians.

  28. they still have to go in the military, just not in combat roles. that is a supreme ct decision, that makes it law. but since we no longer draft ppl that is moot.

    many of those wouldn’t go for political reasons.

  29. So, they are not forced to go to war, as I stated. Thanks

  30. If you actually look at the law, you’ll find that conscientious objectors are asked if they will accept military noncombatant roles, but if they reject even that they are not required to serve.

  31. they reject the war for reasons other than religious.

  32. It seems simple enough, apply the same rules to business/customers that the courts have applied to employers/employees — employers are required to make accommodations so long as it doesn’t place an undue burden on their business. That will take care of most cases.

  33. Even though laws existed way before Jesus? Hmmm, okay lol.

  34. That has nothing to do with the issue. This is not about accommodations. Its about refusing to provide goods and services sold to the general public to customers on the basis of the class of people they are. Straight up discrimination and looking for a religious loophole to claim to be above the law.

  35. But not your kind of Christians. Much like you deny people who refuse to share your bigotry against gays are Christians.

    Please try not to take credit for the work of people whose views you generally oppose in any other situation.

  36. the people who were objectors during the vietnam war were charged with a crime, they were pardoned i think by Nixon later. It wasn’t free for them.

  37. It didn’t seem to be a problem for this discriminatory business.

  38. “Precisely because “we are a cosmopolitan nation made up of people of almost every conceivable religious preference,” and precisely because we value and protect that religious divergence, we cannot afford the luxury of deeming presumptively invalid, as applied to the religious objector, every regulation of conduct that does not protect an interest of the highest order. The rule respondents favor would open the prospect of constitutionally required religious exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind — ranging from compulsory military service to the payment of taxes to health and safety regulation such as manslaughter and child neglect laws, compulsory vaccination laws, drug laws, and traffic laws; to social welfare legislation such as minimum wage laws, child labor laws, animal cruelty laws, environmental protection laws, and laws providing for equality of opportunity for the races. The First Amendment’s protection of religious liberty does not require this.”

    same decision by scalia

  39. No, lets not find terrible excuses why one form of bigotry and discrimination is somehow excusable but the one you prefer isn’t. It still comes down to a harmful act of denying goods and services in open commerce on the basis of the class of customer involved. It is considered not only a harm to the customers but to the market as well. It creates a burden to trade for people to have to navigate the personal bigotries of vendors to receive goods and services. We tried that before. It was called segregation. It was crap.

    “So while my libertarian tendencies” obviously demonstrate why government is necessary for the protection of civil liberties. You obviously appear to support nothing more than “might makes right” when it comes to expression of one’s innate freedoms.

    “Hence, the baker who objects can easily refer someone to another shop that will be happy to bake the cake.”

    Separate but allegedly equal marketplaces…hmmm, where have we heard that before?

    You don’t even pretend that you doing anything but recycling arguments that were used to support segregation.

    ” A television station tried that a couple of years ago and was turned
    down at every Muslim bakery they went to. So why don’t you hear about

    Because it was a phony story. The video showed something much different and far more obnoxious behavior on the part of the person taking it.

  40. Not a denial. Sorry Sandi, you don’t get to put a tramp stamp on the accomplishments of Progressive Christianity and then deny its part of the faith in the next breath.

  41. Apparently, your reading comprehension has finally entered the negative numbers.

  42. So you are going to tell black Americans who qualifies as a civil rights veteran and who doesn’t? Really?

    (That’s how you are coming across, though probably not intentionally.)

    Of course, most blacks prefer to make that call for themselves.

  43. Well, if the Supreme Court says that one can use their religion to discriminate in the provision of good and services in the marketplace, then I hope it’s used against Evangelical Christians. Maybe when they feel the sting of mistreatment and discrimination in the marketplace they’ll rethink their support of it.

    Problem is that folks in such circles believe they’re already being thusly mistreated and discriminated against as a general rule. There’s also a belief that being persecuted, mocked, and scoffed at is the evidence that you’re living in Christ—that if you aren’t experiencing that, you’re necessarily hiding your witness and not being the light you should.

    Some are even citing “They’ll do it to us!” as if it’s justification for what they’re doing, or insisting that folks’ understandably upset responses to straw men and bigotry are themselves displays of bigotry.

    (If you or another reader knows about those factors already, great. I’m just pointing out what I consider pertinent and explaining for the sake of folks who aren’t aware.)

    Once the “turnabout is fair play” happens, it’ll just add to the already-present anecdotal, cherry-picking, or post hoc ergo propter hoc evidence/”evidence” that they’re right, and I think the pervasive attitude will only get worse.

  44. Like I said, take a look at the history of the actual law.

  45. Thank you for recognizing that I didn’t mean it to come off that way. Certainly the African American community should get to define its heroes. But that still doesn’t answer the question of what Thompson did during the Civil Rights Era. I tried to look it up and literally found nothing.

  46. The law allows them not to go, thus they are not a law to themselves. Laws change. Who knows if conscientious objectors will be able to legally avoid conscription in the future–should it be reinstated.

  47. It’s from the use of the female part of the wheat or the male part only in making the flour. But you don’t even want to mention how hetero flour is made.

  48. Actually, all laws came from Christ.

    Plenty of laws predate Christ. Code of Hammurabi comes to mind.

    If you meant to say “divine law” and skipped the mandatory modifier for saying what you intended, then you’re still treating debatable theological position as indisputable fact.

    Secondly, a Christian shuns the appearance of evil.

    That’s bearing false witness about 1 Thessalonians 5:22, which explicitly says “abstain from”—which is a command describing personal responsibility for a person’s own actions. “Abstain from” ≠ “shun”.

    To abstain from something is to not engage in it ourselves. To shun something is to avoid it—and yes, we’re to shun evil, but that’s “evil” ≠ “appearance of evil”. You’re also proof-texting and ignoring that “evil” is defined in many places in Scripture, and scoffers/mockers are the focus of condemnation (cf. Psalm 1).

    We do not have the right to demand others abide by our consciences. I Corinthians 10:29.

    Moreover, consider how Matthew 7:2 applies here. If you demand others must let you refuse service to or socialization with certain parties on account of their beliefs, then you are saying they have the right to do the same to you.

  49. 10 days ago, a man shot over 600 people in ten minutes.

    Our elected Christians have stopped even bothering to pretend that they care. And these jokers, who would have been denied service because of the color of their skin, are complaining that a cake baker has to treat other people respectfully.

  50. The same way they prove their heterosexual, except that they don’t have to. Anymore than they have to prove they are Christians.

  51. Books by david Barton and other Tolkien don’t count.

  52. From a small sampling of actual wedding cake websites:

    -We get the opportunity to celebrate life’s big moments with you. Whether you are celebrating a Bar Mitzvah, Wedding, or a corporate event, we always feel honored to be a part of it.

    -Congratulations, and thank you for selecting us to be part of your special day!

    -Call to schedule your private wedding cake consultation and let us be an intricate part of your special day.

    -We are excited to be a part of your big day, and to show you what we can do to make the sweetest part of your day really special.

    -It would be our honor to be a part of your wedding day!

    -We are always honored to take part in one of life’s most special days.

    Participate – verb; to take PART. From the Latin verb participare, based on pars, part- ‘part’ + capere ‘take.’

    Doesn’t sound new to me.

  53. I don’t bake cakes for immoral weddings, Ben. I doubt floydlee does either.

  54. One’s religion is not a matter of choice. Not if it is real religion. Check the etymology of the word. One is so tied or bound by their inner condition that they cannot willing change it.
    Note: This is only in reference to the use of the word “religion” and is not intended to support or deny anything else being argued here.

  55. “Second, because, in a free society there is an ample number of bakers who don’t have objections to homosexual practice and are more than happy to bake the cake.” But we do not live in a free society, at least those who live in certain areas. If the first bake shop will not bake the cake, and the couple lives in a rural area, they may have to go fifty or a hundred miles to try bake shop number two.
    If a business advertises they are a bake shop, they should do what they say they do. This is more a matter of truthfulness than a matter of gay rights or religious rights.

  56. Actually, Christians promoted slavery, too. There were Christians on both sides of the issue, who were on one side or the other (they thought) because of their Christianity. 

    Nowhere is this more evident than in the history of the Southern Baptist Convention. As Baptist churches in the north became increasingly Abolitionist, Baptist churches in the South objected, and feared their entire sect would go that way. So they broke with the rest of their sect and founded their own pro-slavery version of the Baptist sect in 1845. 

    Many elements of Christian legend were used to promote the idea that black slavery was a divine institution. Among those was the now-infamous “curse of Ham.” 

    The cold fact is that Christianity as a whole is not, itself, inherently pro- or anti-slavery. It has, however, been interpreted both of those ways, by various of its adherents. That’s just how it is. To say anything else is to rewrite history. 

  57. Okay, I’m back; sorry for delay. Let’s talk.
    First, on the Internet, it’s a lot easier to look up “civil rights veterans” if they’ve done Congress, or Hollywood, or Big Media, or high-profile law.

    There’s about eight 100-percent “civil-rights veterans” in my state that I know of, clergy even, who’ve never cracked Wikipedia at all in terms of accomplishments. And they never will. Big Media focuses on the principal soloists, not the second violins.

    It does NOT mean they take a back seat to Congressman Lewis, though. They worked just as hard and took whatever flak came their way. But no media exposure.

    Secondly, Gilbert Thompson turns out to be a VERY good caveat against limiting the phrase “civil rights veteran” to only MLK and his colleagues.

    Boston’s racial crisis of the 70’s didn’t even begin until the Southern Jim Crow had been defeated. And the visually-friendly, easily-understood, good-vs-evil methods of King and Lewis that killed Jim Crow, simply did NOT translate so well to Boston’s situation.

    (So we REALLY gotta stop limiting the phrase “civil rights veteran” to only those MLK folks who crossed the Selma Bridge, right?)

    Now like you, I did some searching too. I think I’m able to show that Rev. Thompson beyond any doubt, was a “civil rights veteran” just like all the rest. He put in his time as a strong leader, he worked out HIS civil rights work on his own terms, and he absolutely played his part in the civil rights symphony.

    (See Part Two, next post)

  58. And, again, the ending of american slavery, ended because of the Christians.

  59. (Part Two)

    Rev. Thompson was with Boston’s Black Ministerial Alliance at the height of their 70’s desegregation storm. (He joined them in 1972; the group itself started in the Sixties.) But there doesn’t seem to be any individualistic “Thompson marched downtown” and “Thompson called for boycott” media stories about him, at least not on the internet.

    Instead, he simply (and competently) led a sizable black clergy force that — when taken all together, not as individualistic civil rights heroes — Boston could not ignore during their school desegregation crisis.

    I was able to locate a PDF document showing that during the aftermath of Judge Garrity’s great desegregation effort, the Boston BMA was working collaboratively with Boston’s diversity-required Citywide Parent Council (one of the the successors to Judge Garrity’s original Citywide Coordinating Council). No small thing, it should be mentioned.

    Now, ought we not to actually LISTEN to what he said? Has Bishop Gilbert Thompson finally earned the right to be listened to by the liberal folks already?


    Boston BMA history/mission (pasted from Yelp)
    Established in 1962.

    The Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston, Inc. (BMA) was founded during the 1960s civil rights movement with a mission to provide spiritual nurture to clergy, advocacy and program services for the larger Black community. Starting as an inter-denominational group of 20 clergy, the BMA has grown to become an inclusive alliance of churches, faith- and community-based organizations reaching around 20,000 ethnically diverse parishioners in Greater Boston. Today, the BMA fulfills its mission by serving as an intermediary organization working in partnership, with over 100 nonprofits annually to make services delivered to low-income youth and their families more meaningful and effective.

  60. Does a black man have to be a designated, recognized hero of the civil rights struggle to have his voice heard, or given weight? For every soldier who gets a medal, there are thousands who fight, suffer, endure and deserve credit for the victory. Thompson was there; he suffered, struggled , endured and won. The effort to downgrade the value of his opinion because he doesn’t have enough public recognition is at best, petty – or at worst, simply ideological prejudice.

  61. Re: “… the ending of american slavery, ended because of the Christians.” 

    And it continued on as long as it did because of the Christians. 

    What part of that do you not comprehend? Are you really as dense as you appear? I get that you’re trotting out an old and tired apologetic point … but it’s only half of the story, and thus is — effectively — a lie.

    Stop lying for your Jesus already. Just stop! He doesn’t need you to lie for him. He can tell all the lies he wants, on his own. There’s no need for you to tell more, in his name, just because you feel the need to do so. 

  62. How about the Jesus of Matt. 19: 4-5? You comfortable listening to Him?

  63. I’m still trying to figure how it is, exactly, that bakers are damaged by selling cakes to gays. 

    I mean that, in all seriousness. I don’t get it. What harm is caused them? Can someone point it out to me? Because I simply don’t see it. 

    I dunno, maybe it’s ’cause I’m a cynical, insolent, godless agnostic heathen, and as such simply haven’t been gifted with the immense sacred insights that would magically show me where that damage occurs — but it’s just not apparent. 

    Until it’s shown to me, I must assume no such damage accrues and that bakers who won’t sell to gays are just the raging bigots they appear to be. 

  64. The point is that they are within the law as stated and interpreted. So it is not the same as the ‘cake bake’ issue.

  65. “Plenty of laws predate Christ.”
    The laws you’re thinking of predate Jesus. Nothing predates Christ, who took historical human form as Jesus of Nazareth:
    “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    He was in the beginning with God.
    All things came into being through Him; and apart from Him, nothing came into being that has come into being.”
    (Gospel of John, opening verses)

  66. And you haven’t answered mine, nor asked a question that’s even pertinent to my counterpoints to your statement.

    Christ is God, but the specific manifestation that is the Christ did not exist until He was born, around 2k years ago. If you meant to use “Christ” to refer to God the Son as a person of the trinitarian or triune God that has existed since before creation, then you omitted multiple mandatory modifiers to specify your meaning. As it is, you’re playing fallacy of four terms and shifting the goalposts.

    Even so, if I assume that you intended to say that all laws come from God, that can be either true or false, depending on how you’re meaning “laws” and “come from”.

    Your explicit statement “all laws came from Christ” is literally and actually saying that Christ Jesus is and has always been the source for every law on the planet, whether it’s a speed limit or North Korea’s many laws that execute people (if not generations of the family) for stuff like, oh, making an unauthorized international phone call—and that His being the source even predates His incarnation.

  67. Actually no. Don’t blame the Civil Rights Act for this gay marriage mess.

    Even now, the Civil Rights Act does NOT allow for gay bullying of Christian wedding vendors, and forcing them to participate in gay weddings/receptions/etc through providing goods and services.

  68. Your wedding florist DOES participate in your wedding.

  69. How can I downgrade the value of his opinion if I’m not being told what he did? What did Gilbert Thompson do? Can you tell me? This is the FOURTH comment from the right alleging that Thompson is a “civil rights veteran” and still, no one has been able to state his accomplishments or even his attempts! And remember, I googled him *before* asking!!
    EDIT: I am reading Floydlee’s response now. Didn’t see it downthread.

  70. Thank you for answering my question. I never EVER said he was not worthy of being listened to. And I’m not a liberal.

  71. now you change the goal posts. At least finish one conversation before starting another.

  72. Actually, it is the same. They could not do it because of God, and the baker gives the same reason.

  73. I don’t know about this kind of argument, Ben. If we’re going to begin making arguments based on mass shootings, well….there’s some 2-way streets ahead.

    As I recall, the assault-rifle mass shooter at the Pulse homosexual nightclub had been previously spotted trying to pick up other guys at this same Orlando nightclub. A regular, it seems. For years. Multiple witnesses.

    Here’s an article link. Be sure to look at the interesting video in the lower left corner. The performer with the interesting makeup job, says he feels “betrayal” at what the shooter did. Indeed.

    Seems to me that the gay activists and their allies never really want to talk about that GAY aspect — that 800 pound elephant — of the entire Pulse tragedy. They got away with white-washing a major tragedy — by one of their own.

  74. Hey – it’s your fantasy god, not mine. So far as I’m concerned the book can claim what it likes.

    The sentiment does fit with the ignorance of the times doesn’t it – you’d think that a god who’d created life forms would
    a) have made a better job of it and
    b) know a bit more about what it had done.

  75. Equivocation fallacy with meaning of “Christ” and fallacy of four terms by assumption that “the Word” and “Christ” are necessarily synonymous and interchangeable.

  76. You changed goal posts, I followed and addressed that, then went back to my initial point all along—which directly confronted your statement “Actually, all laws came from Christ.”

    So sure, I’ve moved the goal posts—back to where they were originally.

  77. I would honestly never classify you as a liberal, but you and I both know that a bunch of these hooly-magoo’s around here, surely are.

    It’s time for the liberal community in general (who regularly overdose on Hooly-Magooism, I might add) to stop acting all silly when they run into black Christian conservatives.

  78. Concisely, to be a Christian means you are a follower of Christ. The greatest commandment is to love God above all. Christians love God through obedience to scripture. The first divine law of Christianity is marriage. It is in the Bible, not the Constitution. A wedding is a religious event. A wedding celebration is where Jesus performed His first miracle.

    Marriage is religious (Genesis 1:26; 2:24, Matthew 19:4), designed in a creative capacity, in the image of God. This is scripture and the baker cannot look at it any other way. For the Christian, a marriage law that contradicts the biblical law is a non-creative counterfeit. This is the burden of conscience for the true Christian because the only union that can satisfy the biblical law is a man and a woman union. If someone wanted to marry their computer and asked the baker to bake the cake, he would decline because it would counterfeit the Image of God in marriage.

  79. “If a business can discriminate, then they can discriminate for ANY reason, including race.” Not even remotely true. You can discriminate for any number of reasons today (you don’t like the customer’s occupation, political views, tattoos, etc.). That ability in no way interferes with the legal prohibition against discrimination based on protected classes (e.g. race, religion, nationality, gender, etc.)

  80. And yet my tennis racket stringer does not?! Come on, that makes absolutely NO sense.

  81. LOL sure. It is just marketing. The place I get all my tennis supplies tells me that they love being part of helping me succeed in tennis. I guarantee you they are not “participating” in my matches.

  82. P.S. I would love to know how many of those bakers attend the wedding ceremony and/or reception. Having served about 300-400 weddings as a waiter, I can tell you I only saw a cake maker at 2 wedding receptions. Most deliver the cake (or have an associate deliver it) about 90 minutes before the reception. Never to be seen again….

  83. I have never seen a wedding cake at a marriage. I have seen them at wedding receptions, which are non-religious.

  84. The wedding cake symbolizes that a marriage has taken place and is used in a ritualistic “cutting of the cake” ceremony where the man and woman feed each other a piece of cake. The top tier is often preserved for the one year anniversary. In essence, the wedding cake is the celebratory signature of the wedding. In the Bible, the first marriage is signed by the Sabbath.

  85. I agree the wedding cake is a celebratory item. It is not religious in the least.

  86. For Christians marriage is religious. The wedding cake is representative of the new union and takes center stage at the religious ceremony. You cannot separate the cake from the ceremony — they go hand in hand. Jesus performed His first miracle at a wedding ceremony, turning water into wine. Wine is also used when taking Holy Communion. One could say “wine” is not religious. But you can see that it is front and center during Holy Communion as it is representative of the blood of Christ.

  87. “The wedding cake is representative of the new union and takes center stage at the religious ceremony. ”

    That is very odd. Granted, I have only been to Catholic, Methodist, Presbyterian, UCC, Baptist and Episcopal wedding ceremonies. Never ever have I see the wedding cake take center stage at the religious ceremony. Most Christian churches would consider that idolatry! Usually there are candles and rings at the center stage. I can honestly say I have never seen a cake at the church! This is new for me 🙂

    Wine at a religious ceremony is much different from the wine at the wedding reception. I would hardly think you would posit that the wine you have with your entree is the blood of christ. At least, I hope you would not say that!!!

  88. For Christians the entire event is sacred. So to clarify, the wedding cake is front and center of the celebration of the marriage ceremony.

  89. Maybe at your tiny Christian sect. I guarantee you it is not at any of the Christian churches I mentioned in the comment above. Also, you can actually have a marriage reception without a cake – and guess what, it is still a marriage!! Again, the cake is not part of the marriage ceremony at all. No bona fide Christian would say it is. (It is borderline blasphemous. Kind of like saying the christmas tree is front and center of Christmas!!)

  90. “How can I downgrade the value of his opinion if I’m not being told what he did?”

    You’ve been told. FloydLee’s responses (below) show that Thompson was an active participant in the Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston during their 1970s desegregation dustup. And you yourself said “I don’t…discount that Gilbert Thompson did important things during that era…” – which would seem to be a sufficient answer to your own question. So – the real question here is not “HOW you can downgrade Thompson’s opinion without knowing anything about him;” it’s WHY you downgrade his opinion despite knowing he was actively involved in the civil rights struggle.” As I said above, I think the answer to that question is “simply ideological prejudice.”

  91. And that’s just it. You don’t set the dictates of one’s faith. Christians have a right to their Christian view of marriage, the correct view because homosexual marriages fail to satisfy the biblical view. If the whole world were homosexual, it would cease to exist. But if the whole world held the biblical view, the world would continue to thrive.

  92. You are right I don’t set the dictates of one’s faith. Neither should you. But your side is doing just that with this whole nonsense. Not every wedding is like your little sect (which is not even mainstream Christian based on your comments on this topic). So why are you evaluating everyone’s wedding with your lens?!

  93. What we are saying here is Jack Phillips has a right to live his life according to the dictates of his faith, Christianity, as he, Jack Phillips, understands it. The First Amendment guarantees this right. And marriage practically opens the scripture as the first divine law of Christianity. Marriage is the union between a man and a woman. You cannot reasonably expect a Christian to look at it any other way. A marriage ceremony is a religious event. A wedding reception celebrates the religious event, and the wedding cake is front and center of a religious celebration.

  94. So Jack doesn’t provide a wedding cake for any wedding that was not religious right? Many people do not get married in a church or have a religious preacher preside over the wedding. If so, at least I would see the consistency in his living…maybe…still weird to impose one’s beliefs on others.

  95. The marriage law as God created and instituted it, is the union between a man and a woman. The fact that God Himself created and instituted it, is clearly written in the Bible. Is what makes it religious, not the building or the preacher. Those variables are ok but are not essential. The only requirement is that it is the union between a man and a woman.

  96. Hmm, interesting. You know not everyone believes in the Bible, right? You also know that the Bible has many variations of marriage beside “man and woman”.

  97. There is but one marriage law, Genesis 1:26;2:24. In Matthew 19:4 Jesus reiterates and confirms the marriage law. I think the point you are missing is that Jack is a Christian and he has every right to live his life according to his faith in every facet of his life. He does not give up his right to be a Christian just because he is a business owner.

  98. I was not told when I posted that, as I had not seen Floyd’s response downthread. And like I told Floyd, I am not downgrading his opinion, I really don’t care about his opinion one way or another. I simply asked who he was, as he was proferred as another civil rights veteran like Lewis.

  99. In the US marriage is licensed and regulated by the states.

  100. “The fact that God Himself created and instituted it, is clearly written in the Bible.”

    That’s your definition of a fact? Not even close. No Adam and Eve, no marriage by god and definitely no wedding cake (a bad food choice for naked people).

    Whether it’s religious freedom or discrimination is now in the hands of the courts.

  101. Several of my Jehovah’s Witnesses friends refused any military role and were sentenced (?) to work with the US Forest Service. They listened to their conscience but had to pay the priced required by Caesar. The same should apply regarding cakes – follow your beliefs and refuse but face civil penalties. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

  102. Only those filthy cowards who fled the country. There was a non-miltary public service alternative for conscientious objectors.

  103. Yeah, just marketing. Kinda like “Oh don’t worry….ssm will NEVER affect anyone else’s life at all…”

  104. Indeed. It hasn’t affected me or anyone else I know!

  105. If that were it, there would not be a problem. But creating a customized cake involves a good deal more involvement with the couple.

    I suspect in the future we’ll see a lot more standard design/online order/pick up in store type of suppliers. Even my quick search turned up several of those.

  106. And of course nobody else matters outside of your little world.

    It hasn’t touched me either. But others have not been so fortunate.

  107. Wow, I didn’t realize the dislike of gay people was so strong that one could not even be in the same room with them for an hour or two and have a couple follow up meetings regarding the design of a product! Most people do order a standard design that is then customized (color, decorative effects). Then there are folks who ask for a very elaborate cake – but that is not the norm (as any baker will tell you).

  108. If you are not a gay couple, it literally does not affect you. It is not “my little world”. If by affecting people you mean that they have to deal with gay people in public, well, that is what it is to live in a society. I deal with people I might not like every day. Of course, I usually have a good reason to not like them, i.e., they are jerks. I just don’t not like someone because they are not exactly the same as me.

  109. I’m not sure of your point so let me just say that Christianity is not up for sale, debate, or compromise.

  110. We have thousands of different religions and sects within these religions because it is a choice.

  111. They weren’t serving in the military, were they? But yeah, a choice between a minor inconvenience of a couple needing to find another baker, or crippling, livelihood-destroying fines creating yet more martyrs. I know which side of the 1st Amendment’s freedom to exercise your religion I come down on.

  112. The greater and more personal the involvment, the more one is “participating” in the event itself. Simple as that. Nothing to do with dislike — I’m sure no one would have a problem with helping them design a birthday or graduation cake.

  113. “Liking” is neither here nor there. Nobody has a problem with dealing with gay people but with being involved in objectionable activities and events.

  114. Re: “The first divine law of Christianity is marriage.” 

    Really? Please provide chapter and verse which says so. Most of us have heard, instead, that the “First Commandment” is “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” But perhaps everyone is wrong about that. 

    Re: “It is in the Bible, not the Constitution.” 

    So, you’re telling me only Christians are allowed to marry? 

    Re: “A wedding is a religious event.” 

    So yes, you ARE saying only religious believers can be married. Got it. 

    Re: “A wedding celebration is where Jesus performed His first miracle.” 

    And that, you think, entitles you to control who can and can’t get married? 

    Re: “Marriage is religious (Genesis 1:26; 2:24, Matthew 19:4), designed in a creative capacity, in the image of God.” 

    Gen 1:27 says humanity was designed in the image of God. I’ll need chapter and verse for this, where marriage is concerned. 

    Re: “This is scripture and the baker cannot look at it any other way.”

    Hmm. Are you referring to ALL bakers? Even non-Christians? 

    Re: “For the Christian, a marriage law that contradicts the biblical law is a non-creative counterfeit.” 

    And this entitles Christian bakers to dictate who can and can’t get married? 

    Re: “This is the burden of conscience for the true Christian because the only union that can satisfy the biblical law is a man and a woman union.” 

    Yes, I agree, running the planet — and controlling everyone’s lives — must be a truly terrible burden. 

    Re: “If someone wanted to marry their computer and asked the baker to bake the cake, he would decline because it would counterfeit the Image of God in marriage.” 

    Marriage is actually a kind of contract. Computers aren’t people and can’t enter contracts, so this is an idiotic and childish objection. Try another one that actually works. OK? 

    Oh, and nowhere in your ridiculous claim of total control over marriage and the private lives of all humanity — Christian, non-Christian, and even non-believers — you never actually specified the location of the damage caused to bakers who sell cakes to gays. 

  115. Perfect. Then bake a cake for a customer. Nothing objectionable there. Not like they are planning mass murder.

  116. Funny the people who participate the most , by your standard, are the waiters and waitresses at the wedding reception. They have the longest period spent with the reception. I guess they should be able to choose when to work or not.

  117. i was there, drafted in 1968, i don’t remember that and cant find it online. do you have a link for that please?

  118. You asked for the Christian perspective and I have stated the facts. Christianity is not up for sale, debate, or compromise. Jack Phillips and every other Christians has every right to live their life according to the tenets of their faith, in pursuit of happiness.

  119. Took some time off from driving gay people to suicide, did you Sandi? Happy I can keep you busy. Oh yeah, except for all those pro-slavery Christians who, quite rightly, pointed to Exodus:21 saying the bible supports slavery. Which it clearly does. Nice try on reworking history.

  120. Oh come on, Jesus would not have been pro slavery. Sandi maybe different but Jesus…? No.

  121. Haha thank you for that first line! Obviously it’s not funny that she and her ilk do smother others in darkness when they should be sharing light, but the reality is that she and friends are smothering others in their version of Christianity:(

  122. Re: “You asked for the Christian perspective and I have stated the facts.” 

    Your version of it, perhaps. Not every Christian objects to the existence of gays. 

    Re: “Christianity is not up for sale, debate, or compromise.” 

    Nor do you have control over all of humanity — sorry to break it to you. 

    Re: “Jack Phillips and every other Christians has every right to live their life according to the tenets of their faith, in pursuit of happiness.” 

    Curiously enough, gays have those very same rights. Interesting, no? 

    Nothing in your fascist diatribes explains the harm that befalls Christian bakers who sell cakes to gays. You haven’t pointed it out. Why do you refuse to do so? 

  123. What Jesus himself thought of slavery is, oddly enough, not relevant here. What’s relevant is what his followers thought of it. It’s incontrovertible that some of them supported it, and in fact viewed it as sacred, a divinely-ordained institution that absolutely had to be continued, in the name of Christianity and its deity. 

    I didn’t make it that way. I just know it’s so. 

  124. As a Christian Jack can only celebrate marriage as God created and instituted it to be and only God can change that. Any marriage law that contradicts biblical marriage is a non-creative counterfeit. For Jack to endorse, celebrate or otherwise participate in any religious event that contradicts scripture causes Jack to sin. This has eternal consequences.

  125. The black ministers are playing with fire in my opinion. The conservatives on the Supreme Court would love to overturn the Civil Rights Act and allow businesses to discriminate again if they want. If the Supreme Court rules that one’s religious belief allows a business owner to violate non-discrimination laws, you can be sure there will be many who will challenge it for race (and religion and gender).

    The black ministers should think of gay people as the “canary in the mine”: if the Supreme Court legalizes discrimination against gay people in the marketplace, it makes it easier to to go after the next group and allow discrimination. They don’t have to agree with the choices gay people make, but they should protect everyone’s right to be free from discrimination in the marketplace.

    It’s pretty shameful that the black minister support businesses saying to gay people “We don’t serve or sell to your kind in here”. If it was done to them, they’d be outraged. Pretty sad that Christian ministers support mistreating and denigrating certain human beings. When you mistreat human beings they aren’t going to listen to your message.

    If Evangelicals continue to support discrimination against a group of people, some day their turn will come, and there may not be anyone left to defend them. If the Supreme Court allows discrimination against gay people in the marketplace, there will be support for discrimination against Evangelicals in the marketplace. We’ll give them the same treatment they dish out.

  126. the word of ELOHEEM, is most specific about this most abominable religion.

  127. Re: “As a Christian Jack can only celebrate marriage as God created …” 

    It’s not he who’s getting married. Being hired to bake a cake is not “celebrating” anything. 

    Re: “Any marriage law that contradicts biblical marriage is a non-creative counterfeit.” 

    So what? Why should anyone who’s not a Christian of your sect care what you think of anyone else’s marriage? What business is it of a baker — or anyone else — to dictate to others whom they can and can’t marry? 

    Re: “For Jack to endorse, celebrate or otherwise participate in any religious event …” 

    This one clause is riddled with so much B.S., it’s ridiculous. First, not all marriages are “religious events” — notwithstanding that you, personally, have defined them all as such. You have no power to decide that anyone else’s wedding is “religious” and therefore yours to control. Second, baking a cake for a wedding is neither an endorsement, celebration, or even a way of participating in it. All it is, is baking a cake. Nothing more, nothing less. The cake isn’t even used in the marriage ceremony itself — it’s consumed at the reception, well after the ceremony has already taken place. 

    And in all of your religiofascist ramblings, you STILL have not identified the harm that befalls a baker who sells a cake to gays. Why do you refuse to answer that question — which is the original one I posed? Is there some reason you can’t provide one? In that case I will assume bakers aren’t, in fact, harmed by selling cakes to gays, and the claim that they are, is a lie. 

  128. Well if the baker didn’t want to sell his wares to the general public, meaning anyone with a reasonable request for something normally sold in the business, they shouldn’t run a store where anyone can walk in.

    You run a business open to the public, you are obligated to serve the public. Regardless of what class of people the customers are.

    If this baker was like you, and so overcome with personal bigotry that he was unable to do that, he had two choices:
    1. Have a spine and face the rightful penalties for discriminatory behavior.

    2. Do business in a closed fashion (word of mouth, no public advertising, membership clubs, in exclusive venues)

    As I see it the baker is spineless. Someone who wants to attack people in the name of his faith but lacks actual conviction to face the consequences if their actions.

    As a Christian you should not be looking for excuses for the consequences of your actions.

    Religious freedom means nobody ever has to give a crap what you think God says, nor can they be conpelled to care. You want to attack people for Jesus, you should not be such a baby about it. Take your lumps and hope God understands. Nobody else has to.

  129. You also don’t get to force others to abide by it either. If you are so overcome by religious bigotry that you have to attack people for Jesus, you face the consequences of it. Don’t expect or demand or expect us to absolve you. God may do that, nobody else has to.

  130. No, the first amendment does not grant you a right to attack people in the name of your faith. Not as discrimination, or human sacrifice, burning crosses on people’s property or honor killing. Your right to free exercise ends when you attack the rights of others to live peaceably.

    You don’t get special privileges for being Christian.

  131. There you have it. The most unambiguous link between the phony religious excuses for discrimination and racial segregation of old.

    You have no problems with segregation of any stripe. Provided you are not on the receiving end of course.

    Typical libertarian bullcrap. Support rights of business entities over actual civil liberties of people.

  132. Thisoldracist is far more honest about the subject than you are. Why limit segregation to just against gays when the rights of business owners can be protected by segregation of all different stripes?

  133. Reality. You want to sell goods and services to the public, you need to serve the public. If you can’t do that, find a more closed and selective way to do business.

  134. Even the bible contradicts your statements about laws.

  135. A business is not a church. It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about a bakery or a restaurant, a photo studio or a factory. They aren’t in the business of providing spiritual guidance or enforcing moral doctrines. They are there to turn a profit. As such, they are obligated to abide by prevailing civil rights laws, whether those laws protect people from discrimination based on race, religion, or sexual orientation.

    Should a restaurant owner be able to refuse service to Blacks because he has “moral objections” to race-mixing? Should an employer be able to fire a Muslim employee because he wants to run “a nice Christian workplace”? And if a Christian florist agrees to provide flower arrangements at a Muslim couple’s wedding, does it mean he is necessarily endorsing Islam?

    If the answer to these questions is NO, what justification is there refusing service to a Gay couple who wish to get a wedding cake or celebrate their anniversary in a restaurant?

  136. The baker sells off-the-shelf products to everyone who comes in his store. I think it mean spirited and cruel for homosexuals to demand a Christian bake a custom “wedding cake” for a religious event that they knew violated the baker’s faith. The baker was targeted and discriminated against by homosexuals. You can “redefine” who you are and what marriage means to you, but you don’t get to “redefine” Christianity. The baker does not have to service any event that is contradictory to his religious beliefs and marriage is the first divine law of Christianity, created and defined in the Bible, not the Constitution.

  137. What a load of bullcrap. If your faith is so obnoxious that you cannot treat a gay customer like any other customer, don’t go into open business. Where you run the risk of exposing your existence to the possibility of a gay person coming into contact with you. Nobody has to respect to your personal prejudices in open commerce. You sell something to the public, you owe an obligation to serve the whole public

    There was nothing unique about the customers request from other customers. Only that they were gay. No different from if he told a black or Hindu couple, “we don’t serve your kind”.

    I don’t give a crap how your religion defines marriage. Don’t have to. I also don’t have to care what you think your religion says about treating gay people. Our laws do not grant you special privileges to attack others in your faith. If you are so overwhelmed by your religious bigotry they you feel compelled to break laws and discriminate, then face the consequences of your actions. Don’t demand that the rest of us have to follow the dictates of your faith.

  138. Who is advocating “segregation” against gays? Please specify.

    And can you define “segregation” for me (it does looks like you may not be getting things correct)?

  139. You are. You want a right to deny them goods, services, employment, medical care, education, housing and rightful access to government services for being gay. You want a privilege to attack the very existence of gay people in public.

    Thisoldracist is just taking your rhetoric to its logical conclusion. One adopted by people who opposed the civil rights movement back in the day.

  140. How would a gay couple know that their request for a cake for their wedding reception (again, a non-religious event would cause such a commotion to the baker? They would have no idea that a cake would violate his faith.

  141. Wait. Family Research Council? The same organization run by Tony Perkins of KKK fame? That’s hysterical!!

  142. Why not, you seem to be willing to decide what qualifies as civil rights, as long as it’s your civil rights that are not being infringed.

  143. Actually he preached for slave servility and that a master should not beat slaves into disability. Slavery was a given to Jesus. Not something inherently objectionable.

  144. Yes, yawn, because you can’t refute. Progressive Christians were instrumental in ending slavery. Progressive Christians stand with gays against discrimination. Those are hard facts.

  145. The same way a person can prove they’re Christian.

  146. So, you essentially have no clue — historical, experiential or actual — what the term “segregation” means?

    (I’d also ask what medical care and education you think I’m wanting to deny to gays, but it’s not clear that the answer would make sense.)

    Hey, we all want the customers’ money in this tight economy. You do, I do, all of us.
    Nobody is looking for reasons to drive gay customers away. But God’s Word regarding gay marriage, simply ain’t for sale.

  147. Yeah…so that’s what you do…retreat to your corner when faced with the truth and start spewing insults. We know your kind which is full of deceit and false accusation. Everyone already knows that race is an immutable trait that homosexuality can’t hold a candle to. In fact Black leaders held a press conference on Monday in front of the U.S. Supreme Court expressing their resentment of homosexuality and rejecting the false comparison between Homosexuality and race. I suggest you check it out. Homosexuality is a sexual behavior that is loaded with lies. In fact it is one lie after another which is why it is a direct affront to Christianity, which is all about the truth.

  148. No, a “wedding cake” celebrates a marriage as does the reception, and for the Christian baker, marriage is religious. The homosexuals targeted and discriminated against the baker and made their request because they knew he would decline because of his Christian faith. The baker does not disavow his faith just because he is a business man.

  149. It would be great to have evidence that the gay couple targeted the baker in colorado. God forbid they chose him because he makes good cakes!

  150. The bakery is not well known and his cake shop is like finding a needle in a haystack. It is well known in his community that he is a Christian.

  151. Do you live in Denver? I do. I had heard of this cake shop before this case. It is definitely not hard to find – it is right near the DMV and a very popular pool hall and strip mall.

  152. The couple went to Masterpiece Cakeshop on a recommendation from their wedding planner. That is a fact of the case. “Homosexuals” targeting the cakeshop is not a fact of the case.

  153. Just saying something does not make it so. So again, how does one prove they are homosexual in public?

  154. Make no mistake, the baker was targeted and it is a fact of the case. They can hide behind their wedding planner all they want but that fact is clear. They and their wedding planner knew or should have known that Jack Phillips is a well known Christian in his community.

  155. I just re-read the case documents. It is not a fact of the case that he was targeted. Nor is it a fact of the case that “Jack Phillips is a well know Christian in his community”. Well, he might be well known in his “community” meaning his church. But not Lakewood/Denver.

  156. PS – I might be wrong – please provide the evidence (citation, link, etc.) which shows that Masterpiece Cakeshop was targeted because the owner was Christian. It will be i all the court documents. Maybe I overlooked it…

  157. I’m sure you didn’t read the Petitioner facts of the case that fast. They put forth the argument that discrimination has occurred, but Jack is the one who was discriminated against.

  158. It doesn’t take long to read the facts section of the case. Plus I have read every single document related to this case from its inception. So I have them bookmarked. AGain, where is your evidence?

  159. The same way that one proves that they are Christian.

  160. Jim Crow…have you ever met your long lost brother Jack?

  161. I am not the one who wants special favors under the law to treat people like crap. You want a level of respect. But you are arguing against treating others with any. Such arrogance with an expectation of privilege!

    There is nothing honest in your view. You were expecting to spinelessly hide behind religion to give bigotry and discrimination some measure of acceptance. Well, tough luck. Malicious intent such as yours don’t get to be treated with genteel courtesy.

    Those black clergy are doing the very opposite of leading. They are hypocrites, seeking to treat others as they have been treated in the past. Whatever past claims they had of supporting civil rights are worthless now, in light of their desire to attack such rights for others.

    The only difference between calls for segregation now and in the past are the targets. Just because your bigotry is different from racism of the past, it doesn’t mean it’s somehow acceptable.

  162. You have invoked “separate but equal” language when referring to vendors or government agencies or anyone else who wants a privilege to tell gays, “we don’t serve your kind”.

    Every article about bills seeking special privilege to discriminate against gays has your glowing support. Makes no difference what is being denied.

    Hey, if you are so overcome with Gods bigoted holy spirit, then it’s best you don’t do business with the general public. Lest you run the risk of eternal damnation by being in the presence of gay people. As I see it, it’s your problem to deal with. Your cross to bear. Nobody else has to give a damn. There are plenty of ways to do this.

    But if you have a store open to the public, advertises to the general public, then you are SOL. You have to serve the general public.

    If you can’t do that, don’t ask for special favors from the law. Just man up and face the consequences. God may forgive you. We don’t.

  163. If you find baking a cake so morally questionable, why do you have a job where you run the risk of having to bake cakes on a daily basis?

    It is as absurd as if a pacifist applied for an army post then went to court demanding the job carve out exceptions just for their benefit, it doesn’t matter how religious the person is the job is what it is and will not fundamentally change based on a whinge. The same goes for Amish folks at NASA, or vegans working at a slaughterhouse. Most people are not so full of hot air as Evangelicals are and most people who can’t bring themselves to do a job don’t do that job.

  164. it only lasted for 6 years during WWII. “The Civilian Public Service (CPS) was a program of the United States government that provided conscientious objectors with an alternative to military service during World War II. From 1941 to 1947, nearly 12,000 draftees, willing to serve their country in some capacity but unwilling to perform any type of military service, accepted assignments in work of national importance in 152 CPS camps throughout the United States and Puerto Rico.”

  165. Tony at the CofCC. (Council of Conservative Citizens.)

    Black Americans who listen to this guy and his message are putting their own liberties at risk. Once he is done with destroying one minority (with our help) he will aim his eternal ire and hatred at another, then another, then another, then he will come for you and who will be left to defend you? You would have already helped him and his lot destroy the others.

  166. No one is taking away his right to be a christian.

    But being a business owner selling goods to the public, he cannot legally discriminate against certain customers. In Colorado, that includes gay people. He broke the law.

    He has every right to follow some minority sect within Christianity if he wants. He is perfectly welcome to be a bigot and blame his interpretation of a religion for it. That’s all up to him.

    What he doesn’t get to do is break the law without consequences.

  167. He choose the fines. He didn’t have to, but wanting to break the law and discriminate against gay people was more important to him. That’s his call.

  168. reading comprehension is hard sometimes, i feel your pain.

  169. Please. just pause long enough to listen to yourself. Being gay is somehow a choice but your particular sect is not a choice? Seriously, just listen to yourself, you should be ashamed.

  170. lol…..homosexuals are not discriminated against by Christians……Sorry it is to easy for you to understand,

  171. Seems like the appropriate response. No desire for knowledge seems like your main character trait.

  172. Why should I drive them to suicide when you do such a good job with your lies? I give them hope that Someone larger than them will help them. You offer death.
    Slavery in Biblical times was different than american slavery which is why I made the distinction. At least try to know what you are discussing.

  173. Refusing to be an accessory to sin isn’t discrimination.

  174. There are a boatload of documents related to this case. In fact the SCOTUS granted cert because of discrimination against Jack.

  175. I guess you’re right, I’d hardly call these people practicing such discrimination Christian.

  176. You need look no further than the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari. p 32.

  177. Yes, there are. And yes, jack’s side is arguing the appeals court was wrong. No where will you find he was targeted by the couple.

  178. no desire to listen to someone’s lies, Etranger.

  179. If you consider elevating them from their sinful bondage that is going to send them to the second death as “discriminating”, I’m not interested in your opinion. Thanks

  180. “God’s bigoted holy spirit”?
    Gotta admit, I’ve never heard of the Spirit of God labeled that way.

    (But then again, we were taught as kids, as per Jesus’ words, to be just a tad careful when talking about the Spirit of God. Don’t want no “screw-ups”, regardless of one’s chosen beliefs.)

    Meanwhile, I’ve served every kind of customer and colleague at my workplace(s), as I’ve posted before. Gave positivity & encouragement to all of them alike, thanks to the aforementioned Spirit.

    By the way, we black Christians already know what you gay marriage supporters intend to do to us. We see what’s coming. We choose to respectfully defy you, all the same.

  181. Umm, the Bible **never** prohibits interracial marriage. Even the JW’s will point that out.

    But as for gay marriage….

  182. Well I am naturally assuming your version of Christian belief is the only one there. Just as you would

    After all you take no personal responsibility for the views you express. It is Gods word. Therefore Gods bigoted views. Not yours. 🙂

  183. Am I supposed to let **you** tell me what qualifies as a civil right? Hm.

    But let’s cut to the chase.

    (1) Gay marriage is NOT a civil right, but instead a national evil, correctly avoided by 98 percent of planet Earth.

    (2) “Obergefell” is totally on par with “Dred Scott” as a wrong USSC decision that needs to be defied for as long as it takes, until defeated if possible.

    I suspect that you may disagree with these two facts. Wanna give it a try?

  184. I disagree with those two opinions. And so did the Supreme Court. It must be awful to have such disregard for your fellow citizens.

  185. Lol this from someone who can’t read their own bible. But also refuses to learn about history. Just because you don’t know it doesn’t make it a lie. You’ll learn things one day, I have faith in you.

  186. Did you even read the article? What message did you get from the depicted caption “One of These Never Happened?”

  187. Black Americans reject your lies — read the article again.

  188. I have faith in God that He will show you His truth.

  189. It is if you choose to define that sin so it is unique to one group of people. But fortunately, this doesn’t need to relay on your or my definition of discrimination. Discrimination in public commerce is reasonably precise and defined through well settled case law in the US. And this case, well, it fits.

  190. fair enough. how about we both agree that we don’t force our opinions on others? can you agree to that simple standard?

  191. What disregard? A **lot** of your fellow citizens, of diverse races and stations in life, including the black USSC justice, and those represented by the black men and women Christians you see in the article, would agree or mostly agree with the two given statements.

    (Enough people, overall, to possibly tip one or two scales in a very close national election? Food 4 thought.)

    Anyway, most folks have much regard for their fellow citizens. Me too, no problem. It’s just that gay marriage is totally wrong for America, or Earth, or even the Local Supercluster of Galaxies.

  192. I don’t force my opinion. I teach what Christ asked to be taught.
    Matthew 28: The Great Commission

    16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in[b] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

    He comes first, my friend. Blessings.

  193. DT…..he was not discriminating against certain customers – he was discriminating against certain events. Events that he cannot participate in. I hope that helps.

  194. Actually the majority don’t. But you are right, some do.. heck, I have family members who do. My uncle Thomas, for example. But he is family, what can you do?

  195. Nope, sorry, a baker refusing to provide a cake for a same-sex wedding is no more discrimination than a Black or Jewish restaurateur refusing to cater a KKK meeting. If the baker or restaurateur refuse to serve gays or KKK members under any circumstances, THAT would be discrimination.

  196. Nothing is wrong with baking a cake. Being forced to be an accessory for a same-sex wedding, whether catering, hosting, taking professional photos, whatever, is where the violation of religious exercise lies.

  197. so, your answer is no then? That’s unfortunate, not unexpected, but disappointing all the same. Lk. 6:36-8

  198. It doesn’t matter how much wish this is how the law worked, it isn’t. The Colorado law and the constitutional law on this is pretty clear. But I guess you will just rail about activist judges or sins of America or some other rationalization when this case gets settled.

  199. I’ll admit,that a creative rationalization. It won’t work legally, but gold star for effort.

  200. Already done that. Guess what? His truth doesn’t differ from historical truth 🙂

  201. Well…not quite lol. You made quite a few misstatements here today and when you were called on it your reply was “yawn”. God wants you to use your intellect. Trust me!

  202. Actually it moreso explains that you don’t understand what you are trying to condemn and have no wish to learn. God bless you.

  203. Again, you don’t understand that which you profess.
    John 7:24 – English Standard Version

    Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”

    1 Corinthians 6:2 -English Standard Version
    Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world?

  204. I gave as much intellect as the comment deserved

  205. Sounds good. Remain in ignorance. Sad state of affairs of much of our country these days. Viva Trumpism!

  206. If you don’t want to remain in ignorance, Etranger…..then I suggest you learn. That will protect you from what you want to blame on Trump. God bless.

  207. Not at all. They granted cert because the anti-gay lobby has money and the ear of conservatives. Otherwise the district and appeals court rulings would have stayed and SCOTUS would have punted.

    Its going down in flames anyway. There is no way Kennedy is going to rule against his prior decisions on the subject. Kennedy is the progenitor of gay rights jurisprudence. Going back as far as the late 90’s with Romer v. Evans.

  208. So prior forms of discrimination were bad, but the one which caters to your personal bigotry is OK. Yep, we got their position down pat.

  209. oh. There is no “trying” here… this is unadulterated condemnation, morally and legally. Morally, there is no defending this baker’s self-righteous, misguided judgement of fellow men. The time will come, he will be judged and have to answer for his hate and hubris… of that, I have no doubt.

    But we need not stand idly by and wait for the true judgment. Fortunately, the laws on this are equally clear: he broke the law and will be held accountable to it.

  210. Gay marriage is just fine throughout the galaxies. It’s a shame that bigotry has overtaken those who have faced bigotry themselves.

  211. “Second, because, in a free society there is an ample number of bakers who don’t have objections to homosexual practice and are more than happy to bake the cake.”

    So the gays have a separate marketplace to cater to them that is equal to the one which rejects them. Hmm, separate but equal. Where have we heard such arguments like that before? There is absolutely no sense of irony in the fact that you invoke the same arguments used to promote racial segregation. Frankly those clergy are acting shamefully.

    How about this, if you are such a raging bigot that you are just completely unable to treat all customers with the most basic level of courtesy and sell them the goods and services you provide, then either:
    1. Take the fine and consider it the cost of your prejudice/God’s will
    2. Don’t do business to the general public.

    But don’t expect the rest of the world to sign off on such malicious and harmful behavior towards others. The laws aren’t there to give you a privilege to attack people. If you can’t play nice with others, deal with the consequences like an adult.

  212. Evidently some have joined hands with people who would gladly have them lynched.

  213. Well, that is the risk you run having a business open to the general public. If treating all customers, even gay ones, with the most basic level of professional courtesy is such a burden, don’t open your business to the public. Do business by word of mouth, exclusive venues or membership clubs.

    It isn’t being forced, its doing the job one holds themselves out to the public as doing. You don’t get to attack people without facing consequences. Discrimination in open commerce is a legally recognized attack on the rights of the customer.

  214. 1 Thessalonians 5:22King James Version (KJV)

    22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

    There’s your reason. Fight with God now DT.

  215. Go back and read what I said. One’s religion is not a matter of choice. That was said as a corrective to what Ben said. It is also true that being gay is not something that is freely chosen, but that is not something that Ben and I disagree on.

  216. really? it’s like you are just searching online for chapters without bothering to understand them.

    Jn 7 is all about holding to a higher standard. 24 in particular is a call to judge his action (breaking the sabbath) by the righteousness of the act. There is nothing righteous about discriminating against anyone, most especially sinners. It is our duty to stand by them, not judge them.

  217. I figured invoking a few galaxies might get your attention.

    Meanwhile, your accusation of bigotry is duly noted. I have no accusations for you, but you can see that the black Christians won’t let such accusations stop them. Me neither.

  218. So it is OK for me to go around saying things I do not believe? I don’t think so! That is why there are thousands of religions to which I do not belong.

  219. you do realize that discriminating against people is evil, right?

  220. Not when you are following what Christ taught. He takes precedence.
    Act 5:29 – English Standard Version
    But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.

  221. Hold on Spuddie. Where is this all coming from? Was this reply meant for me or bmayer504? I am saying that the bake shop has no right to not bake the cake for the gay couple.

  222. ahh… and there we have it. Justifying evil by claiming your interpretation of the word of God is the one true understanding.

    Here is a hint:

    If you think the Lord wants you to be evil toward your fellow man, you are getting it wrong.

  223. My bad. Missed where the quotes ended any your statement began. I got confused. It was a response to bmayer504.

    Cheap phone

  224. “But don’t expect the rest of the world to sign off on such malicious and
    harmful behavior towards others. The laws aren’t there to give you a
    privilege to attack people. If you can’t play nice with others, deal
    with the consequences like an adult.”

    Amen, brother Spuddie, amen.

  225. Of course not, that’s how bigotry works and continues.

  226. Blacks are believers and Religion that homosexuals oppose is a pillar in the Black community. So hijacking the civil rights movement falsely claiming that homosexuals can be compared to Blacks is way beyond outrageous and it is insulting to Blacks and their ancestry. Homosexuals must apologize to the black community for this. Blacks embrace the Church and religion — it’s what got them through the unspeakable horror of the past and will see them through to the future. How dare that below call them bigots.

  227. Many “homosexuals” (some estimates are 40-45%) are believers in the same religion as black people. There is no apology needed from a group that is facing discrimination and public maligning at every opportunity.

  228. You can’t reasonably expect Christians to accept lies as truth.

  229. Homosexuals are the ones who want to destroy religion and the Church which is the heartbeat of the Black community. Blacks are not deceived by the homosexual lies.

  230. The message i got? Pretty much the same one I’m getting right now which is, I should have to pass a literacy test before being allowed to comment on this article.

  231. Holding to a higher standard, yes. The scripture you submitted is about nit-picking. Judging with “righteous judgement” I would say is moreso is agreeing and seeing things as God sees them – as homosexuality being a sin, etc.
    Following what Christ taught is following righteousness.
    Refusing to appear as if condoning evil (a homosexual wedding) is a godly action.

  232. It’s pretty easy to understand, “abstain from the appearance of evil’
    And again….DT…..he was not discriminating against certain customers – he was discriminating against certain events. Events that he cannot participate in. I hope that helps.

  233. No one is falling for that homosexual lie. Race is an immutable trait. Homosexuality is a sexual behavior that can change. There is no such thing as a religious homosexual unless they are recognizing and repenting of their sin. And most Blacks resent homosexuality which is perhaps due to their spiritual connection with the Church.

  234. You do realize there are gay people that are black, right? And those black ministers don’t speak for all black people or even all black Christians (much less those of other or no religion). There are plenty go black people, black Minsters, and the black leaders that support the full rights of LGBT Americans and oppose discrimination in ALL it’s forms.

    When she was alive, Coretta Scott King supported the full civil rights of gay Americans, including marriage. And she said if her husband (Dr. King) were still alive that he too would support gay people and be opposed to discrimination.

    I realize that Evangelical Christians have a deep-seated hatred of gay people, but they are out of step with both human decency and a majority of Americans. Do what you want in your churches, but in the marketplace you have to follow the law.

  235. There are gay people of all races. Homosexuality is a deviant behavior, not a race. It cannot be compared to black civil rights. No, the Kings do not and will not support homosexuality because it is a direct affront to Christianity. Martin Luther King was a man of God, a man of deep faith who had divine dreams. No he would not support anything that opposes God who he loved and served well. That’s just another homosexual lie.

  236. apparently, it is harder to understand for some.

    Fortunately, most Christians in this country are able to see past this self-righteous, evangelical misunderstanding of the word that dooms this narrow band of evangelicals in the dark. In all bigotry, there is hatred and fear that leads people astray.

  237. How disrespectful you are! You didn’t learn this from Jesus

  238. There is no such thing as a homosexual Christian, unless they recognize their sin as sin and are seeking repentance and forgiveness. But if they are parading around mocking the holy rainbow symbol while celebrating pride in their sin, that person is a liar don’t believe it. They reject who God created them to be and want to rid society of religion. As I said before, there are homosexuals of all races — it is a deviant sexual behavior that can change. Race is an immutable trait and falsely equating homosexual struggles to the black civil rights movement insults Blacks and their ancestry. Homosexuality is not a race. Black leaders just sent a message – No you will not hijack the black civil rights movement as if Blacks are ok with that. No — they resent the homosexual comparison. As the article states, Black leaders have set the record straight.

  239. It’s quite possible that the Supreme Court will rule against the baker, it seems like Justice Kennedy decides his vote by what side of the bed he gets out of in the morning so who knows? But the odds that President Trump will have another Supreme Court appointment before the end of this term are good — VERY good if the hints that Kennedy will retire after this court season are true. And that means the odds are good that we can get one more SC justice that at least halfway recognizes the limits the Constitution places on the federal government, and state governments thanks to the 14th Amendment. Then, we’ll see.

  240. Give it a rest. You prey on the vulnerable with your discredited, dangerous “conversion therapy”. You’re an ordinary sadist, who has found a socially “acceptable” way to practice. Clad in this thin veneer of religiosity, you say the most ghastly things to people, and you clearly enjoy it. It’s sickening. As is your ludicrous claim about American slavery.

  241. “I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people. … But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King, Jr. said, ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’ I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream, to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people.” – speaking at a conference organized by the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force (2003)

    On March 23, 2004, she told an audience at The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey in Pomona, New Jersey, that same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue. She denounced a proposed amendment advanced by President George W. Bush to the United States Constitution that would ban equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. In her speech, King also criticized a group of black pastors in her home state of Georgia for backing a bill to amend that state’s constitution to block gay and lesbian couples from marrying. Scott King is quoted as saying “Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union. A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriage.”

  242. Black organizations that support non-discrimination with regards to gay people:

    National Urban League
    National Black Chamber of Commerce
    National Coalition of 100 Black Women
    100 Black Men
    National Black Nurses Association
    National Association of Black Engineers
    National Medical Association
    United Negro College Fund
    National Black MBA Association
    National Council of Negro Women
    National Association of Black Journalists

    … in other words, the oldest, largest, and most well supported black organizations in America.

  243. I don’t understand why black homophobes think hating gay people is somehow going to magically convince the GOP and the Trump administration to stop being racist to them.

  244. I don’t care what you do or don’t accept in your own life. The moment I am told to adhere to your moral code so that you can feel better is the moment I not only stop accepting what you say, it is the moment I intentionally act contrary to what you say as an act of defiance.
    My marriage, or that of anyone else, no more needs your approval than your marriage needs mine.

  245. It’s highly likely Kennedy will vote against the baker. Also highly likely he will not retire any time soon. The Merritt Garland debacle killed any chance of that happening.

    President Cheeto is lucky if he can make it through one term without the Republicans in Congress mulling over “25th Amendment solutions”.

  246. I would just say respectfully of Ms. King that she allowed herself to be deceived by homosexuals. She should have listened to those who were speaking the truth. I believe she had no knowledge of the homosexual opposition to the Church and religious freedom. If she did, she would not have been able to be supportive of any movement that opposed her husband’s first love, God. She may have been deceived but today’s leaders know full well what’s behind the gay agenda and they have set the record straight.

  247. And that’s what you do when faced with the truth … retreat to your corner and start spewing false accusations and insults.

  248. Huh? False accusations? Insults? Hardly. I was pointing out your awful behavior.

  249. Then you should take that and apply it to yourself and respect the rights of Christians. Do not expect them to bend their beliefs to satisfy yours and sin along with you. Understand, homosexuality is a biblical abomination and marriage is the first divine law of Christianity. (Genesis 2:24-25). It clearly defines marriage and male and female sexuality. It’s in the Bible, not the Constitution. Practice what you preach.

  250. Stop the lies and false accusation. They not once said they “hated” anyone. They are simply setting the record straight by rejecting the false notion that homosexual struggles are like those of the black civil rights movement. The Black cause will not be trivialized by homosexual lies and innuendo. Blacks love the Church and their race will not be used to come against it.

  251. You must also remember that Dr. King was a Reverend as was his father. I had the opportunity to tour his home, his church, Ebenezer Baptist, and his grave site. I also toured the King Center and I know for a fact that Dr. King never supported homosexuality because his fight was 100% Black! Again, do not attempt to mar the history of African Americans by falsely equating their plight with homosexuality.

  252. I spoke the truth. You cannot be for and against God at the same time. That is an impossibility as Jesus pointed out in Matthew 12:25-26. Jesus left no stone unturned and the scripture cannot be manipulated to be for and against
    God at the same time. For this reason, it is an impossibility to be a “gay Christian.”

  253. yep. Hopefully you can see the error of your ways and repent. He will welcome you back. mt 9:13

  254. Says the great liar who discriminates against religious beliefs, Christians in particular.

  255. I got nothing against Christians, the vast majority live true to God’s word. It is only the couple of minority sects who abuse His word to rationalize their hatred and fear that I have a problem with. If you think God wants you to be evil toward your fellow man, you are getting it wrong.

    Discriminating against LGBTQ people is getting it wrong and you will be judged for it.

  256. here’s a simple truth: anyone who claims an entire group of people are homogeneous in viewpoint is some combination of stupid, disingenuous, or bigoted.

  257. … they are out of step with both human decency and a majority of Americas.”
    and God.. don’t forget God, they are out of step with basic tenets of Christianity

  258. Please stop tarring all Christians with your false testament. LGBT Christians are far more Christian than you will ever be.

  259. great, let us know if you ever start following Christ. Bigoted mistreatment of follow men ain’t following Christ.

  260. Well, it does seem you’re right. The phrase “The mere possession of religious convictions which contradict the relevant concerns of a political society does not relieve the citizen from the discharge of political responsibilities” in Scalia’s response is undercut by the abstinence from military service for religious reasons.

  261. Why are you so obsessed with this issue? It seems unhealthy to hate and try to deny civil rights to people, good American taxpayers, parents, homeowners, voters, citizens. You have made my friends and family into a terrible monster in your own image. They are ordinary people and what they do in their bedrooms is of no interest to me and should be of no interest to me. Get over your fixation. It’s unhealthy for you.

    “What does the Lord require of you? that you love mercy, do justly, and walk humbly with your God.” In your comments I see no mercy, no justice, no moderation (only extremes), and no humility. As the Congregationalists say, “God is Still Working.” Who are you to speak for God? if you try you only show what a monster you would make of God. Man is made in the image of God. You would make a tyrant god in Your own image.

  262. So, let’s enlarge our view to that of the whole universe, not just a few galaxies. We will see how we are such tiny, insignificant beings. No one can justly claim the kind of utter hubris and and arrogance you claim. Get a grip.

  263. I am a minister and have black Christian colleagues. They would look upon your posts with pity. You serve the wrong Lord when you start hating and ranting. Do you not know the commandment to “Love your enemies”? I don’t see you as an enemy but you seem to want to see anyone who doesn’t agree with your extremely contingent views cast out into utter darkness. Do you want to play God next and cast people you disagree with OUT?

  264. 2 Corinthians 2:14 – ESV The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

  265. Genesis 1:26; 2:24-25; 9:13; 19, Leviticus 18:22; 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 1 Timothy 1:10

    This is scripture. It cannot be compromised. For example, marriage is religious (Genesis 1:26; 2:24, Matthew 19:4), designed in a creative capacity, in the image of God, sanctified by God, and signed by the Sabbath. This is scripture and the baker, the florist, the photographer, etc. cannot look at it any other way. For the Christian, a marriage law that contradicts the biblical law is a counterfeit. Spiritually speaking, when one counterfeits the image of God, it is considered the signature of Satan or the mark of the beast. In this context, same sex marriage is signed 666. If someone wanted to marry their computer and asked the baker to bake the wedding cake, he would decline because it would counterfeit the Image of God in marriage and its signature also would be 666. This has eternal consequences.

  266. Ugh! Why do you insist on engaging Sandi’s brick wall, rubber-and-glue intellect? Remember, you never win when arguing with a fool.

  267. And you are ridiculously incompetent if you think an entire group of people did not endure four hundred years of unspeakable horror, including slavery, lynching, Jim Crowe, systemic racism, educational disparagement, housing disparagement, etc., you name it, because of the color of their skin, regardless of their social view. No homosexuality will not trivialize Black civil rights.

  268. I did not claim any of this. now you are just making stuff up.

  269. [wry smile] Why do you assume that Sandi’s intellect was my target?

    Proverbs 26:4 is followed by Proverbs 26:5.

    Not everyone has the knowledge, training, or experience to be able to identify faults in logic. Pointing out direct issues with folly can be useful for helping witnesses who can’t quite identify an explicit problem, themselves—and that’s only one of the audiences involved when you’re responding to folly in public. There are others.

  270. So the millions upon millions of loving Christians in other denominations who don’t discriminate against LGBTQ people are all misunderstanding the teaching of Christ?

    sorry, if you want to abuse God’s word in a feeble attempt to justify your fear and hate, that’s up to you. But you don’t get to claim your minority viewpoint of scripture is representative of all Christians: it is not.

    And you don’t get to act out your hate against your fellow man without consequences. This baker broke the law, if he wants to claim his faith demands that he discriminate, then he can also man-up and face the consequences.

  271. No one ever claimed that “homosexual struggles” were the same as the Black civil rights struggle. But discrimination is discrimination.

  272. Are you a “tiny insignificant being”?
    God says quite the opposite of you.
    Apparently you’re really, really important to Him (Jer. 29:11).

    Time to upgrade your self-esteem!!

  273. Oh, yes you DO see “mercy, justice, moderation and humility” in my comments; because those specific items are what actually gets gay and pro-gay folks’ attention. (I merely put some Bible and BBQ sauce on top of it, to boost the flavor.)

    So don’t even try to whine at me, because you already know that I value your post (though disagreeing), and value even the Gay Goliath activists, from the heart. I see people’s faces, and listen to their voices, not just the usual talking-points and debates.

    By the way, the correct UCC phrase is “God is still Speaking.” See, I’ve visited their churches too, just like the MCC’s (you know who *they* are, don’t you?)

  274. I saw that. I wish I could say it’s unbelievable.

  275. I”m not the one with the arrogance to tell everyone here that you are right and everyone else is wrong–and a pervert, to boot.

  276. Jesus didn’t have personal enemies. You do. You fear and/or hate gays. You have a blackened heart when it comes to maybe 10% of the population. I’m not LGB or T. I’m straight but not narrow.
    Also, I know, that hatred harms the hater, usually, more than the people being hated.

  277. Just a small note on the NAACP:

    The individual NAACP chapters, and each individual member, were never allowed to vote on the gay marriage issue for themselves.

    The pro-gay dictators at the very top, were totally scared to allow the NAACP members to vote their own conscience.

  278. “Straight but not narrow.”
    Which is merely code for “I openly reject what the Bible clearly says regarding homosexuality and gay marriage.”

    That’s the real deal here. Not hate, not fear.

  279. You are a minister? It’s a great calling (trust me). But so are the black ministers in the article. They’re all taking a very necessary stand.

    You “are not my enemy” either, but we ain’t on the same page, and there are real people at stake.

  280. Whose fooling who here? Most homosexuals are atheists.

  281. Why do you think this is even a case? It is because Jack Phillips was targeted and discriminated against by homosexuals because of his Christian lifestyle.

  282. Oh, so now Mrs. King was an idiot who couldn’t think for herself. She was too stupid to realize she was deceived.

    Or more like, she thought through the issue and came to the conclusion that injustice and mistreatment of human beings is wrong, no matter who they are.

    You should be ashamed of denigrating a great lady and civil rights leader!

  283. You keep telling yourself that, if it makes you fell better. But, in my experience, many LGBTQ are deeply spiritual.. many are christian, but there is also pretty good representation of most of the major world religions.

    But that’s not the point here. The point is that the majority of Christians in this country are not extremist evangelicals and you are misrepresenting the majority of Christians.

    Anyone who uses God’s word to try and justify hatred, bigotry, fear, or discrimination against fellow human beings is straying from Christ’s teachings.

  284. Jews, who suffered unimaginable tragedy and were targeted with mass extermination, are very supportive of gay rights. And they marched with black people during the civil rights era. Jews recognize that allowing one group of people to be mistreated opens the gates for them to be mistreated. And they know what it leads to. So, there’s something for the black ministers to think about.

    Just because one has suffered greater discrimination and mistreatment doesn’t mean that other people’s mistreatment and discrimination is justified. How about NO mistreatment and discrimination against anyone? We’re all human beings. If you don’t like being mistreated and discriminated against, then don’t do it to other people.

  285. The SCOTUS already interfered in religious law once by hijacking marriage from the Bible. The baker enters the court already injured by the SCOTUS same sex marriage decision. If the SCOTUS rules against Jack Phillips, it would be creating a new orthodoxy, a same sex orthodoxy that Christians and other people of faith would have to submit to, and believers are not willing to play games with lies and forfeit eternal life. So the SCOTUS created this mess. Now it will be interesting how they legally dig their way out of it.

  286. Pennyroyal, I just wanted to extend a word of thanks for being in communion with me and others. My family, friends and minister came to my wedding. Nobody said no, and nobody we know and wanted to join us was excluded in case they said no.

    I’ve been blessed beyond words and with so much love. My cup overflows. So sorry you are experiencing the strange and bizarre world of some kinds of ‘so called’ Christians 🙁

  287. Then homosexuals should stop targeting and discriminating against Christians for their religious beliefs that are protected by the Constitution.

  288. You can’t twist scripture and mock God’s laws to make it convenient for you. You can do what you want but you cannot force Christians to abandon their faith for yours.

  289. I googled the lines and for each, got thousands of hits but certainly not just wedding cakes as per first example. I think any participating is in the taking as much of the customer’s money as possible. Really, just simple commercial advertising/marketing.

  290. I know this for a fact because in order to be a Christian, you must be a follower of Christ and it’s impossible to follow Christ, yet reject His doctrine. So the one who is deceived is you. We true followers of Christ heard His warning loud and clear to “…see to it that you do not allow yourself to be deceived.”

    Christianity, the doctrine of Christ, is about the truth, the way, and the life. So no, a man cannot turn into a woman, and a woman cannot turn into a man regardless of surgery and hormone therapy. Two men cannot produce a child, nor can two women. A child cannot have two biological mothers or two biological fathers. A true Christian accepts their creative nature, and rejects the same sex orthodoxy religion that counterfeits the image of God in marriage. A true Christian accepts the teaching that God is love, 1 John 4:8, and rejects the creed “love is love.” A true Christian appreciates God’s holy rainbow symbol, Genesis 9:13), and rejects the false claim that it means gay pride.

    Homosexuals reject the doctrine of Christ, therefore, it is impossible for homosexuals to be Christians unless they are recognizing their sin as sin and seeking repentance and forgiveness.

  291. The evidence does not indicate that this position is accepted by over half of this historically Black Protestant community (Pew 2014)

  292. Jesus did say that ‘broad is the path that leads to destruction.;

  293. No Sandi. I will always identify you as what you are. A sadistic ghoul preying upon others for your sick thrills. Conversion therapy is banned for minors in your own area of Windsor, Ontario, because it is objectively harmful. Every psychiatric professional organization worldwide has decried it and banned it. And yet you continue to promote it. It’s beyond disgusting. You’re a dangerous predator.

  294. I’ve been targeted and discriminated against for my celibate lifestyle—by fellow Christians, no less. Anecdotes have limited value for general application.

    While discrimination due to Christian lifestyle can happen, that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily common. It’s my experience that folks who cry discrimination due to Christian faith are often (not always, but often) crying wolf, that the actual problem is something more like demanding others obey them as if the Christian is their god. Sometimes, it’s even demanding someone else pretend they don’t exist.

    Even if such discrimination is the norm (and there doubtless are some circles where it is, just from how anything has someone who scoffs at it), it doesn’t justify a Christian responding in kind.

    We are commanded to love our neighbors (which includes folks we consider heretics) as we do ourselves—to treat others the same way we want to be treated. Not “Do unto others as they have done unto you.”

    So even if some person or group is being discriminatory, that’s ultimately irrelevant to how the Christian is to treat the person or group.

    In most contexts, when there’s an irreconcilable difference between us and someone else, the most we’re told to do is to walk away. Maybe shake the dust off our sandals while we do it. But it’s to leave ourselves, not demand they do.

  295. It is also an impossibility for a man to turn into a woman and vise versa. The truth is born a male always a male and no amount of fake surgery or fake hormones are going to change that. (Isaiah 55: 5-11) You must remember who Jesus said He is — “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one gets to the Father except through me.” (1 John 14:6). Therefore, you cannot reject the Truth, circumvent the scripture, counterfeit the image of God in marriage, mock His holy rainbow symbol, parade and celebrate pride in you sin and state “love is love” as your creed, when you know full well that God is love, 1John 4:8, and claim to be a Christian. True Christians are not fooled by your deception and Jesus most certainly isn’t.

  296. Take a step back from your self righteous hubris and just think about the specific ways all those other christians are deceived. Then do the same for your little sect. Who violates more scriptures?

  297. One might well look at it in that way, but even the choice of such an idea as a marketing gimmick suggests that customers find it appealing for its contractors to at least claim that they feel personally involved in the event (whether they actually do or not).

    In any case, it’s certainly unreasonable to claim that this is some kind of totally new concept of participation, when businesses use it all the time and evidently get results because of it.

  298. Only if you are of the mind that the law is only for the protection and interests of your kind of Christian and nobody else. Again religious freedom means we never have to abide by what you think God says.

    Yes, you have to submit to the idea of sharing the country with people who do not share your bigotry. It is part of living in a democracy. Your faith doesn’t get to dictate whether people have access to goods and services in open commerce. If your eternal soul is so sullied by contact with gay people, that is your problem, not anyone else’s. Don’t open a business to the public then. Don’t make it the problems of anyone else.

    BTW Marriage is a civil legal status. It confers rights and obligations under the law regardless of religion.

    Jack was not being oppressed for having to follow laws prohibiting him from oppressing others. Being a Christian does not grant you special privilege to attack others in the name of your faith. If you are in a business open to the public, you are obligated to serve the public in a reasonable manner.

    Stop being so spineless. Instead of demanding undue privilege from everyone else to act like obnoxious discriminatory bigots, take the punishment received as a sign of your faith. Jack should hold himself out as a martyr. Not demand special favor and exemption from the law.

    Christians like you are worthless. You are unwilling to face any kind of potential difficulty for your faith and demand others to treat you special. At their expense no less. If you feel oppressed by treating others as human beings, with the most basic form of common courtesy, tough luck. That is the big drawback to not living in a theocracy for you.

  299. Here’s another bit of irony: You’re attacking Trump by accusing him (figuratively) of homosexual behavior.

    Which means homosexual behavior must be wrong after all. Thanks for establishing the point!

  300. bingo. the golden rule.

    why is such a simple concept so difficult for so many?

  301. Anything to protect children from the immorality of this culture. I’m sorry that you aren’t as observant.

  302. There you go. A predator at work, claiming to “protect children”. It’s YOU that that is harming them, Sandi. The law is in place to protect children from YOU.

  303. Actually Tuesday, you are wrong;

    Leviticus 18:22 – 22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.

    Leviticus 20:13 – If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them.

    It doesn’t get any more Jewish than tha

  304. Don’t forget about 2 Corinthians 4:4 when dealing with DT

  305. Absolutely:

    1 John 2: 4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,”

    1 John 1:6 – If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth.

    1 John 2:3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.

    1 John 3: 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

  306. What Martin Luther King actually thought about homosexuality

    Civil Rights , Homosexuality , Martin Luther King

    Today America honors both the life and noble work of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., a Bible-believing Christian minister who did more to advance the cause of race-based civil rights than perhaps any other person in recent history.

    Regrettably – and as they do each year – the same flock of opportunist “LGBT”-activist vultures will quickly swoop in, and pick the live flesh from MLK’s character-based “dream,” to advance their own behavior-based nightmare.

    In what amounts to a sort of soft racism, this mostly white left-wing faction has, over the years, disingenuously and ignobly hitched its little pink wagon to a civil rights movement that, by contrast, is built upon the genuine and noble precepts of racial equality and humanitarian justice.

    What was MLK’s position on the homosexual lifestyle and so-called “gay rights”? While he said little in public on the issue, what he did say made his viewpoint abundantly clear. Unlike the “LGBT” lobby, I’ll let Dr. King speak for himself.

    In 1958, while writing an advice column for Ebony Magazine, Dr. King responded to a young “gay” man looking for guidance. To avoid being accused of “cherry-picking,” here is the exchange in its entirety:

    Question: My problem is different from the ones most people have. I am a boy, but I feel about boys the way I ought to feel about girls. I don’t want my parents to know about me. What can I do? Is there any place where I can go for help?

    Answer: Your problem is not at all an uncommon one. However, it does require careful attention. The type of feeling that you have toward boys is probably not an innate tendency, but something that has been culturally acquired. Your reasons for adopting this habit have now been consciously suppressed or unconsciously repressed. Therefore, it is necessary to deal with this problem by getting back to some of the experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. In order to do this I would suggest that you see a good psychiatrist who can assist you in bringing to the forefront of conscience all of those experiences and circumstances that led to the habit. You are already on the right road toward a solution, since you honestly recognize the problem and have a desire to solve it.

  307. It isn’t a choice of who violates more. It’s who is forgiven. Homosexuals do not follow Christ and are not forgiven.

  308. Contrary to popular belief, repeating something over and over again, does not make it true.

  309. Then I suggest you tell Christ that. He has been teaching it for about 2000 years:

    1 John 2: 4 Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,”

    1 John 1:6 – If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth.

    1 John 2:3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.

    1 John 3: 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

  310. that would require a capacity for shame. There is zero evidence that these bigots have any such capacity.

  311. You have said it. Amen! Jesus left no stone unturned so there is no way they can deceive anyone with their lies and deceit.

  312. You are fully loaded with lies and false accusations. Don’t think for a second that you can spew insults and latch on to any icon of the black civil rights movement and insult their name at the same time. You should apologize to the King family for using such foul language in the same sentence as the much respected Coretta Scott King. You have stooped so low that your comment does not deserve a response. Shame on you!

  313. I guess we shall see whether the Supreme Court determines that any business owner can discriminate against whomever they want, as long as they cite “religious freedom” as an excuse. Maybe they’ll be able to turn away Muslim job applicants.

  314. The Black ministers I know would despise the hatred spouted by the bigotry you uphold.

  315. I gave you the proof that Loretta Scott King supported gay rights, including marriage equality. I told the truth of what she said. You lied about her being anti-gay. Then you accused her of being “deceived”, thinking her too stupid to make up her own mind. I called you on it. Sorry, but you don’t get to claim her for your “God Hates F-gs” agenda.

  316. Homosexuals celebrate pride in their sin and reject the teachings of Christ. They falsely accuse Christians of discrimination if they don’t accept homosexuality as righteous. They reject who God created them to be in their creative nature, and instead embrace that which is false, claiming their “self-identity” false creation is equal to God’s natural creation . The devil did the same thing by rejecting who God created him to be and wanted to make himself equal to God. False children of God are deceived since they think they can “identify” to be a “gay Christian,” while their actions actually show them to be children of the devil. John 8:42-46.

  317. Hey by the way good work, and remember that even regardless of belief in God or any religion for that matter, there are common sense reasons that may even very well overlap with religion to opposing this same sex marriage stuff, remember don’t forget that people maybe so blinded by their own pride that they can’t see that same sex marriage had the potentially to create problems. Think about how the studies say that the children are unaffected by gay parenting as well as show no significant differences, that is not entirely accurate, they can still do a good job parenting, while it is not to say they are bad parents not bad proplr at all for that matter, the point here is that while they maybe able to give love and do a pretty good job parenting, while not always every single child is affected in quite the same way as it does other children, the thing you have to remember is that it does not quite provide the same benefit as they would like to believe compared to heterosexual couples.

  318. And homosexuals should stop targeting and discriminating against Christians for their religious beliefs. If you don’t like the Bible, stay out of it and stop stealing laws and changing them when you know it conflicts with religious beliefs.

  319. By the way I remember also understand how sexual orientation is not a federally protected status, in a majority of or at least half the states it is a state protected status. The thing I’ve would like you you to remember here is that I have spoken with you before and I’m pretty sure you realize that the Supreme Court if not all the justices as well as a majority federal district judges and federal magistrates need to learn boundaries because they are overstepping their authority as well as ruling by their interpretation when it is not always their place to rule. What they should have done was recused themselves and left that right to the people. Instead of doing that, they took it upon themselves to rule when it was not their place to do so at that time as well as being blinder by their own pride nor should they have shot down DOMA. No matter how much it is the law of land which it tragically is also what matters as same sex marriage is, if you have the correct view point consider this as well and realize as much it’s tragically the law of the land, what also matters here most importantly is that NO MATTER how anyone chooses to look at it or no matter how much one is entitled their opinions, those opinions regardless still don’t change the fact that by ruling when they should not have done so is still nothing more than merely an excuse by using they way they interpreted the constitution and that is still indirectly legislating from the bench.

  320. Thanks Sandi…I’ll be sure to add it! BTW your posts are right on point.

  321. Remember my friend that the interracial marriage in addition to the fact it is between man and women as well as differences are a person of different races despite being male and female marrying somebody of another races and why it was eventually overturned is because it was part of the federal enhancement civil rights act around the 1964 and overturned interracial marriage ban in 1967. The Supreme Court has gotten things wrong before and the ruled against blacks back in 1857 of something like that but gay marriage despite some similarities could never be the same thing.

  322. So believer tell me something what do you you think of my history I read up on as well as listening to the right people?

  323. Hey my friend, glad to see you back out here! We make a great team and we are winning the debate. I do agree with you about the problems within the judiciary, and that’s just it. We are supposed to have a system of checks and balances — the Executive Branch checks Congress via veto. Congress can override a veto with their check. And yes, you have said it — the judicial system can check them, with the SCOTUS being the final arbiter. So here we are with the SCOTUS decision being the law of the land, as you correctly point out, and what they did was hijack the first divine law of Christianity, marriage, and pretended that they had Constitutional authority, when marriage isn’t even remotely part of the Constitution. It’s in the Bible. And We, the People, must check them on this because the baker enters the courtroom already injured by the SCOTUS same sex marriage decision.

  324. I have a different view of this. When it comes to children I feel that homosexual couples that adopt children have stolen each individual child’s right to both a mother and a father. Neither two men nor two women can provide the same loving familial environment as a mother and a father. Homosexual parenting only results in the child growing up missing half of their rearing experience, and left wondering where their other biological parent is. It is flat out wrong to trick children into thinking they can have two moms or two dads. Absolutely despicable and it is sickening!

  325. Wow, you went through a lot, mostly restating what I said, to prove nothing except that I am right. The marriage law, Genesis 2:24-25; and the one Jesus reiterated and confirmed in Matthew 19: 4 — Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
    25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.
    establishes human sexuality and marriage.

    God’s divine laws governing creation are different than His societal laws, commandments, governing man. They can be distinguished in that God Himself instituted divine/universal laws, as did He, through man, Moses, institute societal laws. Divine laws can’t be broken or “redefined” because only the universal law itself satisfies creation in the will of God. Any law that attempts to “redefine” a universal law is immediately revealed as a counterfeit since it is impossible to accomplish the end result.

    For example, the will of God says that male and female in his image should be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. (Genesis 1:26-31). A male and male, or female and female relationship cannot fulfill this law and is immediately revealed as a counterfeit, image of the beast, not the image of God, not the real thing, and certainly not “equal” to the divine universal law for marriage and reproduction.

    Commandments are different in that they will be broken because of man’s imperfections. However, God also established a way for those who believe to have an opportunity for salvation through repentance. forgiveness, and conviction by the Holy Spirit according to the testimony of Jesus.

    “Let there be…, “ “Let us…,” “Therefore shall…,” are all indicators of God’s universal laws. “Thou shalt not…, ” Thou shall..” are examples of societal laws. Marriage is one of God’s universal laws that fulfills His will for creation. God’s universal laws can’t be broken, because only the universal law can establish God’s will.

  326. I’m going 100 percent agree with this statement

  327. Thank you I’m pleased to work with you and I’m greatful to be a part of this

  328. My friend remember this with or without religion, what ones sexual orientation or attraction to someone is nor each other is something else but how one acts upon it especially when comes to acting upon it sexual is a certainly a choice choice and if a person is a Christian and fails to use good self control by acting on it that way then it becomes pretty serious after crossing that line and then you lose yourself, therefore it becomes a sin.

  329. Remember it started off as a religious thing and while it still is, It expanded to civil matters, and remember that regardless of religion too but while religion it is still important, it did not mean that gays needed to be entitled to it nor where they ever entitled to it. Do not forget how common sense in general and even in religious version of It also overlap, cross paths with each other. Those gay marriage bans we had once in this nation in many states where here for reasons partly religious but regardless of religion other common sense reasons before they were tragically shot down by a majority of if not all of them being rogue federal judges and federal magistrates as well as 4 of the 9 Supreme Court who were too blinded by their own pride to see this and it should have been federally constitutionally banned to prevent the federal government along with the judges and Supreme Court from overstepping their authority and they would not have even had chance. That DOMA law they also shot down first of all and tragically in 2013 despite ironically being signed by at the time was president and now former president Bill Clinton a democrate sadly was not sufficent enough protection to prevent this type of corruption. This is an example of just how foolish we may have been as people were as well as failing to realize we needed an amendment and the DOMA was not enough protection

  330. Congratulations. May your lives together be joyous, loving and compassionate.

  331. By existing and not accepting being attacked? If your religion and church are threatened by that, it speaks poorly on your faith.

    Plenty of religious folks with actual morals and integrity are not so threatened by gay people in their midst. Christians even.

  332. Another “my bigotry is different” argument. Ho hum.

    Let me clear up a misapprehension you have.

    Marriage equality was granted by the courts because the bigots could not trust voter apathy. By legislating bans, they made it an equal protection issue. Those who took active measures to ban marriage equality came up empty for rational, secular and honest arguments to support their position. They still can’t cough up something which isn’t complete bull crap.

  333. Another bullcrap position. “The Supreme Court doesn’t have the power to rule against what I want”. Despite having such power for over two centuries.

    Sexual orientation is covered by the 14th amendment, see Romer v. Evans.

    You are being a whinybaby. You don’t like the Supreme Court rulings but can’t for the life of you cough up sane legal arguments to support your position. So you attack the entire judiciary.

  334. You guys should just get a room together at this point. 😉

  335. Lier lier lier,had a enough of your deception and I have heard enough out liers and manipulators like you. Shut your trash up loser

  336. Bigot is triggered!

    I can’t help it if your scripted position is so overused and betrays such flagrant ignorance that people can come up with nicknames for them.

    Bigot needs to come up with some original thoughts. He is far too predictable.

  337. Yeah right why don’t you scram and send this partily true as well as these lies and deceit somewhere, because I have heard enough out of you

  338. God causes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust. Jack lives his life as a Christian and his belief about marriage is biblical. As I stated before, marriage is in the Bible, not the Constitution. Again the law that sets the order for marriage and family is Genesis 2:24-25, and is reiterated and confirmed by Jesus in Matthew 19:4. Marriage is not even remotely part of the Constitution. If it is where is it stated? Or site the authority SCOTUS used when it created the same sex marriage law?

  339. Bigot is triggered! Get bent. You expected to spout those word salads and not get criticized for them? Give us a break.

    Why don’t you try coming up with original thoughts, instead of recycling truly brain dead arguments.

    Your hysterical and childish reaction shows you are not used to dealing with people outside the Christan bigot echo chamber. Learn to defend your position.

  340. Oh shut up you pink and stok thus playing bs card about bigotry with me and other who oppose it seriously because nothing you say is entirely accurate. If you don’t stop I will remove you from my chat room space.

  341. In fact as of right now, considering how much of a liability as well how much a dangerous person you are to handle if not physically but just a danger to deal with emotionally. I am done handling people like you and I’m going remove you st this time from my chat room space.

  342. Shut up and by the way you are full of sh;t yourself, so at this time you are removed for now and that enough of you playing these ridiculous bigotry accusations or other problems that you’re causing. Removed

  343. You are complaining about the label but doing squat to show why it is incorrect. You are stumping for a privilege to attack the civil liberties of people because they are gay. That makes you a bigot. If you don’t like the label, tough luck. It’s appropriate.

    Nothing you have said was remotely true. SCOTUS had every right to make its rulings. Sexual orientation is a class subject to heightened scrutiny under the 14th amendment. Colorado’s anti discrimination law was constitutional. The baker unambiguously violated it. There was no special privilege to violate it under any notions of free speech or free exercise of religion.

    You are a little whiny baby who can’t defend their position. Grow up.

    If you don’t like what I have to say, block me. I am not going anywhere.

  344. Believer I just remind you this person named spuddie I had to remove from talking to me because he is really playing those bigotry accusations.

  345. Your inability to defend your position is duly noted. There is the option to block me if you don’t like what I have to say.

    But as long as you feel the need to spout such overused scripted nonsense, I will feel the need to address it and correct it.

  346. Hey Believer by the way have you had someone play the bigotry accusations with you,

  347. LOL!!!:) All the time. That’s the first name they spew when they know they are losing the debate. Jesus strengthened us by saying when they start to say all manner of evil against His followers falsely for His sake, we have to rejoice and be glad and remember that they did it to Him first and the ones before us.

  348. You know you’re winning when they do that. I have been called all kinds of names, insult after insult. I don’t pay any attention to it and stay focused on the debate. Name calling accomplishes nothing, but it lets everyone know their true character.

  349. You know also that when people play the bigotry card accusations, that they also play this card because they want to control the argument

  350. I note, the first “law” in chronological order in the text of Genesis is actually, “from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat” (Gen 2:17). Gen 2:24 comes after that. 

    But hey … what could this cynical, insolent, godless agnostic heathen possibly know about it? 

    Re: “And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” establishes human sexuality and marriage. 

    It does no such thing. It simply says they were naked but unashamed of it. 

    Re: “God’s divine laws governing creation are different than His societal laws, commandments, governing man.” 

    This is a distinction without a difference, one you’ve woven out of thin air in order to rationalize your assertions. 

    Re: “For example, the will of God says that male and female in his image should be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.” 

    If that’s true, then it should be illegal for married heterosexual couples to be childless. Do you plan to agitate for laws like that? If so, why not? Why would you demand gay marriage be outlawed but childless marriages not be outlawed? Both are Biblical demands — according to what you just told me! Are you consistent with your Biblical fascism? If not, why? 

    Re: “God’s universal laws can’t be broken, because only the universal law can establish God’s will.” 

    Why, exactly, do you require even people who don’t believe in your deity, to obey your deity’s laws? On what basis can you assume control over their lives? 

    Oh, and in your effort to enforce your deity’s laws on everyone, you’ll have to take up arms against even some of your co-Christians. Yes, some Christian sects approve of gay marriage. Really, some of them do! 

    Time to go after ’em! 

    Oh, and … nothing you’ve posted identifies the exact damage that is caused to bakers who sell cakes to gays. I assume no such damage occurs and that you — and you Christofascist friends — are lying when you/they say that it does cause injury. Does it make you proud to lie for your Jesus? Does he need you to lie for him? I figure he can run around telling his own lies, if he wants, and doesn’t need you to promote them for him … but again, what could this cynical, insolent, godless agnostic heathen possibly know about that? 

  351. Re: “As I stated before, marriage is in the Bible, not the Constitution.” 

    Irrelevant. Your Bible is not the law of the land (in the US, anyway). 

    Re: “Marriage is not even remotely part of the Constitution.” 

    Lots of things aren’t in the Constitution but are still legally valid. Contracts, for one. (There is a “contract clause,” in Article I sec. 10 which prevents states from impairing contracts, but that does not, in itself, make contracts valid or not). 

    And curiously, marriages are contracts. Were you aware of that? I doubt it. 

    Oh, and I love your argumentation here, which is, “Marriage isn’t in the Constitution, therefore I, and my co-Christianists, claim sole authority over it. We get to decide who can and can’t marry — and there’s nothing government can do about it because marriage isn’t mentioned in the Constitution.” I invite you to take such an argument into any court in the country and see how well you do with it. Please. Go right ahead. Do it! You’re sincere about this belief, so I can’t see why you wouldn’t attempt it.

    Get off your lazy behind and just do it already! 

  352. Nobody should be targeting anyone. Unfortunately though, there are some “Christians” who insist their translation/interpretation is the one that is True. (Oh wait, I just identified myself there, as well as those who disagree!)

    I am a child of God though, even if others disagree (“You are not His” etc)

    Some Christians say I must have chosen to be gay, and/or I can change this (drugs, therapy, prayer…) but this is their discriminatory beliefs and it manifests itself in their behaviors. Today, that is no longer acceptable to us, so the “reality” of our existence collided with their “belief” and faith is put on trial against God’s created reality.

    Frankly, if a baker said they did not want to make a cake for my wedding then I would go to another baker! I found nobody at all refusing services to me and my partner of ten years. Not one. The cake maker, the flower arranger, the caterers, the musicians, the preacher, the composer I had to ask for rights to copy their music… not a single issue. I feel for those who were told no though. I actually booked a place to stay in the US last year and they said no when I told them we were two married guys. I reported their discrimination because if they want to advertise rooms on the platform they are using, the terms and conditions of that platform expressly states that this is not acceptable. They have to advertise elsewhere.

    I don’t think telling us to “Keep out” of the Bible is what God is saying to any Christian. We don’t like change. Sometimes we claim we embrace it, but in our selves we don’t like it. Isiah would not have written about new paths (or streams, etc, depending on your preferred translation and thoughts about the Bedouin discovered scrolls)

    Sure there is conflict. Conflict with religious beliefs. Yours. And mine.

    We can live out of our disagreements and waste our lives “in perpetua” on disagreements about matters that will not change back to positions held centuries ago, or we can work on the things we have shared belief in, like feeding the hungry, caring for the oppressed, working against injustice globally, such as the killing of Christians.

    Peace and love.

  353. Look! I’m doing a new thing;
    now it sprouts up; don’t you recognize it?
    I’m making a way in the desert,
    paths/streams in the wilderness.

  354. “There is no such thing as a homosexual Christian,”

    Er yes there is. Created by Him.


  355. Hey Believer do you ever consider the fact that these LGBTs are GODS children though they don’t always have the ability to believe that?

  356. No I don’t think that’s a fact at all. I believe that there are people of all walks of life that are not children of God. Why I love Jesus so much is that He left no stone unturned and these questions have been addressed in John 8 where like matters are discussed in detail.

    My personal opinion is fundamental to Christianity, and I always look at what is the truth and what is a lie in any situation to discern the difference. I know the Truth is of God and Lies are of the devil. The greatest commandment is to love God with your whole soul, your whole mind, and your whole heart. That is to love Him with all that you are, in all that you think, and all that you do according to scripture. You can’t bypass this commandment to get the second which is like it, to love your neighbor as yourself.

    In the Masterpiece case, since Jack is a Christian, he loves and honors God through his work by intricately designing wedding cakes to celebrate marriages that are consistent with the first divine law of Christianity. (Genesis 2:24-25). This scripture creates the family dynamic and male and female sexuality. I know this is true because it is the written word of God and it is how anyone that ever existed got here.

    Those who come against Jack for his religious beliefs are children of the devil and what they bring with them is a lie that counterfeits the image of God in marriage, as we talked about before. The truth is a man can not turn into a woman, and a woman cannot turn into a man is biblical, scientific, and biologic facts. No child has ever been naturally produced from two men or two women. Therefore we know as a matter of fact that homosexuality is a lie and comes from the devil because it is a direct affront to Christianity.

    That’s not to say that all homosexuals are children of the devil because there are those who recognize their sin as sin and repent and seek forgiveness for their sin, such as Janet Boynes who is featured in this article. In this case she would be considered a child of God.

    The truth is marriage is in the Bible. (Genesis 2:24-25)
    The lie is marriage is in the Constitution giving SCOTUS authority for “redefinition” of marriage. (SCOTUS is unable to cite its authority
    The truth is SCOTUS does not have any authority for marriage and a Christian should not service, support, or celebrate any counterfeit of God’s true laws.

  357. Also I agree with you but can you say that at least they are acting like children of the devil, because last time I checked can you at least realize that we are all children of god but not everyone believes in god as well as not everyone acts like a child of god but say their behavior is why they are acting like children of the devil, I don’t think they are bad people, but the things they are doing are potentially bad stuff, we are trying not to judge these people but I gets hard to avoid doing it indirectly, last time I checked while I have faith that we are winning the argument, we should love and care for the sinners but hate the sins they do as well as not care for everything associated with that type of behavior.

  358. No I can’t say that. I’m not willing to compromise my faith for any reason because I believe it has eternal consequences. God said homosexuality is an abomination I believe Him. If homosexuals parade around mocking God’s laws and saying all manner of evil against Him falsely, and falsely accusing Christians of hate and discrimination because they only accept the truth, I believe them. Jesus said in Matthew 10:37 that anyone who loves any person more than Him is not worthy of Him.

    I think its good to be compassionate, but only when it’s appropriate. In this case, providing a wedding cake for a same sex celebration is not representative of a cause to be compassionate. Coming to the aid of someone who is sick or otherwise in need of basic human needs is a reason to be compassionate.

  359. Also I believe that anyone who would attempt to force a person of faith to say or act in a way that offends God is not worthy of compassion in that context.

  360. I am glade to work with you again and I’m willing to understand this of course

  361. I’m glad to work with you too and I think it’s good to have varying opinions but I believe our end goal is the same — we both support Jack. For example, I believe that in this case Jack’s position is more like what blacks went through because he is being forced to affirm a set of beliefs that violates who he is as a Christian.

  362. A. My friend there is something else that I would like to show you and I’m sure you are well aware of this as well. Remember this that there are 9 justices on this particular bench at a time. While he has now been replaced on the bench by Gorsuch, this was before Justice Antonin Scalia who was on the bench before he passed away at the age of 77 in the month of February just about a month from his birthday month of March where he would had been 78 and if here were still alive today then he’d be 79.

  363. B. This is with regards to the Obergefell case that the majority of 5 of the 9 justices along with despite being a conservative associate justice Anthony Kennedy used when they ruled in favor of and unfortunately having led to and in a sense the tragic nationwide legalization of same sex marriage across this country. Remember that the 4 justices including, Chief Justice John Roberts as well as Antonin Scalia who passed away last year, and last two who are still alive include justices Samuel Alito and finally who one is an Africa American man by the named Clarence Thomas were not in favor of it at all. They may not have been part of the merits of case but their opinions are absolutely relevant despite same sex marriage tragically becoming law of the land and they absolutely do have a point despite it does not change the fact that corrupt law has taken affect.

  364. C. See look what is happening now as people of Christian faiths are now being vilified and certain aspects of religious freedom are now under attack and they are in danger. The Kim Davis person is an example of how things like this happen when bad laws are mad. Now I will say that if I were in Kim Davis case then I would have just resigned to prevent this liability as a corrupt law it has become. I will also tell you that though I don’t approve of nor do I entirely agree with, but rather semi agree with Kim Davis in how she handled that matter, yes I will mention that though she was acting hypocritically in some aspects of her faith perhaps, it shows what happens when bad laws are made.

  365. D. Now as much as I hate to say this as well as regret putting it this way, I’m going to have to say this is with regards to Kim Davis. Though I do understand that the things others say may not think she was acting right at all in her position, I find it is only fair to say in this case, regardless of what other peoples opinions about her are, despite they are entitled to have their differences in opinions, rather than fully disagree with how she handled things, like I said semi agree with the way she handled it but I won’t and I certainly don’t entirely agree with every single method she used when she went about handling this situation, because not all of it was proper handling.

  366. Your knowledge of these issues and the hierarchy of the SCOTUS is impressive. I am one of the people who supported Kim Davis 100 percent. She was elected by the people and was solid in her position before the false same sex marriage law. She didn’t resign and she didn’t have to. It is unconscionable in 2017 that she would spend time in jail for her religious beliefs. I think she ultimately won her case.

    Justice Anthony Kennedy is a real liberal posing as a conservative. You would think at the highest level of the judiciary that they would be able to discern the truth from a lie. But Sotomayor is a political activist who has no business sitting on the court. Just because she supports same sex marriage does not mean the entire U.S. has to. These two justices pose a real problem for Jack.

    I am a firm believer in our foundational principles that are Judeo-Christian. Just like the men and women who fight for our freedoms, we must do the same and not allow the government to force acceptance of a false ideology, through business or otherwise, that contradicts and mocks our faith.

  367. “The SCOTUS already interfered in religious law once by hijacking marriage from the Bible”

    Er, well maybe I’m wrong, but weddings were not exclusively religious events in the US, were they?

    Since it was and is possible to marry in most western countries without any religious references, I’m not sure how it is hijacking marriage from the Bible?

    In the UK, people of the opposite sex could marry without any religious content/context. That didn’t change the day they changed the law to permit marriage of same sex couples. It’s taking churches time to “catch up” with the change to the law. Most still won’t have a wedding service of a same sex couple in the church building. I just don’t see the hijacking from the Bible in the US (or the UK either)

  368. For Christians who are gay, a wedding is sacred. So I agree with that! Of course for non-Christians it is not and that doesn’t make their weddings invalid.

    The cake at my Christian opposite sex married friends was never front and center of the marriage ceremony. It was in the room AFTER the ceremony.

    At the front was a table with the newly married couple and their best man, and their parents. The cake was off the the side every time. We ate, had speeches, drank wine and took some cake home or had a piece after dinner.

    And the above was true for my same sex wedding. My wedding was just like my straight friends weddings. In every way, except their was no wedding dress. And we had two ‘Best Men’ 😀

  369. “Marriage is the union between a man and a woman.”

    Not always… not anymore!

    “You cannot reasonably expect a Christian to look at it any other way.”

    Over time, they will. Or they can be in the minority who don’t. Maybe join Westboro Baptists…

    “A marriage ceremony is a religious event. A wedding reception celebrates the religious event”

    No it is not always this way. Not at all. And when a couple, straight or not, gets married in a civil service with no religious content, then the wedding reception doesn’t celebrate a religious event.

    “The wedding cake is front and center of a religious celebration.”

    No it isn’t. At least, never at ANY wedding I have been to or watched. I include my same sex wedding, the televised marriage of members of the British Royal Family (can’t get more religious than a service in St Paul’s cathedral or other such huge public events). The cake is NOT front or center!

  370. There is no such thing as a “gay Christian” or a “gay Child of God” if you reject God’s teachings and affirm a set of false beliefs that contradict His divine word. It just isn’t possible because God created female specifically for the male to be joined in a creative capacity, in His image. God created and instituted the family dynamic as the first divine law of Christianity, Genesis 2:24-25. Jesus reiterated and confirmed the divine law in Matthew 19:4. Isaiah 55:6-11 also reaffirms that which is living that comes from God produces. Homosexuality is not productive and only leads to a physical and spiritual dead end. You can “redefine” who you are but you can’t “redefine” scripture or force Christians to accept the same sex orthodoxy.

    God’s divine laws governing creation are different than His societal laws, commandments, governing man. They can be distinguished in that God Himself instituted divine laws, as did He, through man, Moses, institute societal laws. Divine laws can’t be broken because only the divine law itself satisfies creation in the will of God. Any law that attempts to “redefine” a divine law is immediately revealed as a counterfeit since it is impossible to accomplish the end result.

    For example, the will of God says that male and female in his image should be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth. (Genesis 1:26-31). A male and male, or female and female relationship cannot fulfill this law and is immediately revealed as a counterfeit, false image of God, not the real thing, and certainly not “equal” to the divine universal law for marriage and reproduction.

    Commandments are different in that they will be broken because of man’s imperfections. However, God also established a way for those who believe to have an opportunity for forgiveness and repentance through salvation, and conviction by the Holy Spirit according to the testimony of Jesus. “Let there be…, “ “Let us…,” “Therefore shall…,” are all indicators of God’s divine laws. “Thou shalt not…Thou shall…” are examples of societal laws. Marriage is one of God’s divine laws that fulfills His will for creation. God’s divine laws can’t be broken, because only the divine/universal law can establish God’s will.

    The Good News of The Gospel is more about prophesy, future events, that teaches us how to understand and respond to future trials when confronted with falsehoods. Adam and Eve allowed themselves to be deceived. But we have redemption through Jesus and His warning to us, many times over is “…see to it that you do not allow yourselves to be deceived….” And we will not allow ourselves to be deceived by the homosexual agenda that is loaded with lies.

    True Christians — our eyes are wide open. We have constitutional freedom to Love and Honor God in how we live our daily lives, both publicly and privately, and do so in all that we do according to Scripture. The People of Faith believe God is Love (1Timothy 4:8) and reject the creed “love is love.” The people of faith believe that the rainbow is a holy symbol of God’s holy covenant with man and reject the falsehood that it means “gay pride.” True Christians believe that you cannot be for and against God at the same time. True Christians believe that marriage is a holy union between a man and a woman.

  371. Some straight people want to do that. And it’s a huge generalization to say homosexuals want to. Some likely do, but we don’t all want to!

  372. “You know you’re winning when they do that”

    Is the aim to push people into doing that then? So you “know you’re winning”?

    I’ve been guilty of the same feelings. That I’m “winning”…

    My pastor advises us all to review Galatians 5:22-26. For those of us who are Christians it is something we probably should sign up to before every post!

    Of course, such a signing up process would not work for non-Christians. Which of course, based on your assertions, means I am not going to subscribe to it (I’m gay, therefore cannot be Christian being your claim)

    Doesn’t mean we cannot all hope and pray to listen to the advice for Galatians!

  373. E. Now with these things being said and although I don’t entirely agree with everything she did, I still am going to say as it may not have made her better than anyone else in every single way by the way she handled it, more importantly this is my opinion in part and not solely my opinion, it is a relevant statement, regardless of whether anyone thinks it is relevant or not relevant does not change the fact that despite same sex marriage being as sadly in some aspects as it relevantly as well as corruptly the law of the land, regardless of that too…the majority of five of the Supreme Court justices as well as majority of federal judges should not have legalized it either. So despite Kim Davis was not acting entirely proper with how she handled every thing, I will 100 percent support her but not 100 hundred percent agree with everything she did and neither where the judges as well as SCOTUS when they did this by disrespecting the will of the people, therefore legalizing gay marriage.

  374. F. Remember Obama claimed to be a Christian too but he was also being posing as one, he was very dishonest as a politician being president despite some good he did while not a whole lot of good, he may not have had any direct control over the SCOTUS but he conspired to be part of the gay marriage stuff as well as lied about that as well. You know whether democratic or republican, doesn’t matter either, a lot of times these days now you have to except the fact that a majority of these politicians are just too hypocritical and a lot of them are, regardless of who you vote for or what yours of other peoples opinions are for or against them or even regardless of religion the politician may have, they as politicians and people who vote for them need to learn that sometimes no matter how optimistic or pessimistic they appear to be that they don’t have the ability to nor do they fit the criteria to fix everything but just sometimes create more potential problems. Remember it does not matter what someones opinion is nor how some one views a situation nor does it necessarily matter if something is a crime or not, legal or illegal, nor does it always matter what a persons religion says either, and a person does not have to necessarily go to jail for something to be wrong, sometimes corruption is corruption as well as sometimes wrong is wrong no matter people say does not change that either. End of story

  375. Yes, he is winning the debate because he is telling the truth, but when they resort to name calling we know they recognize he is winning. We love God and we will not compromise our faith for yours.

  376. By the way my friend and ally Believer I’m going to say that for the most part I cannot disagree with so much of these things you are saying, while these associate justices we both have mentioned here have the potential to be of greater good instead they are posing more of the potential to create problems which they already have. This has already naturally been confirmed by us as well as other people having the proper point of view by the way they are acting if not corrupt as individuals but to be more fair at least they maybe acting corrupt in their position they hold as justices on THE SCOTUS bench by doing things they ARE NOT supposed to be doing as well as getting away with it when they really should be held accountable as well as removed from their position as justices for this behavior.

  377. Let The People say AMEN!!!:) At least removal of the ones that want to use the law to force acceptance of a false ideology that contradicts Christian values that our country was founded upon.

  378. A. By the way my friend if it is not too personal I’m just wondering what state are you in if you feel comfortable that is my friend? Another thing by the way my friend, Justice Kennedy may not be and is not a bad man at all nor may justice Ginsburg be a bad woman and she is not a bad woman all but however even though they are in the 80s as much as i’m trying to respect these people, regardless you still have to understand that none of these things are an excuse for what had occurred and this includes their age as well as no matter how many years of experience they have with the law, especially including by the way they are interpreting constitutional law, and they are not an excuse at all for this diet of misconduct as well their ignorance, which of course ignorance itself is also not an excuse for their failure to use good judgement . This also has to do with that stuff regarding how they’ve ruled on this matter with gay marriage. B. By doing this, they had allowed their political opinions as well as allowed too much of their own pride to blind their reason with how they interpreted the constitution with regards to how they legalized gay marriage. For the last time, none of those things are even excusable.

  379. Take one guess — you might be right! I do think that SCOTUS can not promote a set of orthodoxy beliefs on the entire country.

  380. Sorry you are wrong 😉

    I’m a gay Christian and a child of God

    Further, and I know it displeases many, God is doing a new thing. Like the streams in the wilderness. It’s new, not what you want to see, hear, acknowledge… it’s unexpected and not in line with your beliefs… see it sprouts up.

    You don’t want change. You fear it is wrong. You hold the belief firm. I understand that. And I don’t expect you will change. Just as I shall not.


  381. Agreed – you don’t need to compromise your faith. We won’t either.

    And outside of our faith, if you want to be in business to the public, the public includes gay people. The courts will determine if you can discriminate against them without financial/other penalty.


  382. I’m curious to know why you’re so interested in gay innuendo.

  383. It’s simple — I’m a true Christian, and I love God. When the gay agenda persecutes one Christian for their religious beliefs, it persecutes all Christians and we are warriors for Christ as you’re finding out. Jesus charged us with the responsibility to be the watchers of the signs of the times — know and understand them. And the gay ideology is one of them — the mark of the beast 666. If we have knowledge of these things and refuse to impart it and people sin because of it, their sin is on us. If we impart the knowledge and they refuse to accept it then their sin is on them.

  384. I think your knowledge on these issues is exemplary and I believe God has chosen you to stand up for His cause, and you are doing a great job. Keep doing what you’re doing.

  385. The baker serves everyone that comes in his bakery. What he won’t do is create a custom “wedding cake” for a “same sex wedding” event that violates his faith. I’m sure you understand the difference that marriage is religious for Jack.

  386. I will continue and at the same time despite the fact that I don’t to hurt these LGBT’s I need to at least care for them but not care for their certain behaviors of theirs, yes he did choose me to be on this earth as well as what I’m doing is if he may not had chosen me for directly but given me an opportunity in part as well as doing it to the proper extent that I should by voluntarily taking a part in this conflict by dedicating not exactly my whole life but a part a of my wholeness if mylife to speaking against these lies, deceit and manipulation of this tragically legalized nationwide Marriage equality/same sex marriage across the country.

  387. And that’s just it. No Christian is going around discriminating against homosexuals causing “dignitary harm.” That’s the lie being perpetrated. They are the ones targeting and discriminating against Christians for their religious beliefs because they know homosexuality is a biblical abomination.

    IMO you are much more forgiving than me; however, I am reluctantly willing to learn from you — I’ll do my best. I can’t promise you anything because I have a major problem with people who lie and try to convince others that their lie is equal to the truth and folks believe it! To me, there is no excuse for that. I won’t judge either, but I will stand up for the truth when I know they are blatantly misleading people. That is the reason why the homosexual agenda gets zero sympathy from me.

    When I look at the price that was paid for Christians to be able to live our lives in pursuit of happiness according to the Good News of the Gospel, taking time to post comments in support of religious freedom cannot hold a candle to their sacrifice. Think about it. Jesus laid down His life for a ransom for many. Each of the Apostles died a brutal death spreading the Word except for one, John, who wrote the book of Revelation. And they and many others died preserving the Word in Scripture. The Bible was printed and circulated in Ink and Blood. It took generations of persecution to enjoy the religious freedom we have today. So we should and we must stand up and defend our faith. This is this generation’s battle and I know we will win.

  388. Biblical marriage is certainly relevant in this case. Jack is a Christian and he only believes in Biblical marriage. He has every right to live his life in accordance with his faith in pursuit of happiness. Jack loves God and no one, not even the courts, can tell Jack when he can love and honor God in his business or at any time.

  389. Re: Biblical marriage is certainly relevant in this case. 

    For you it is, but not for everyone. If people want to be in marriages that aren’t “Biblical,” they can. 

    Re: Jack is a Christian and he only believes in Biblical marriage. 

    Good for him! But what does that have to do with someone else’s marriage? 

    Re: He has every right to live his life in accordance with his faith in pursuit of happiness. 

    Right. And that’s as it should be. No one can force him to marry a same-sex partner against his will. 

    Re: Jack loves God and no one, not even the courts, can tell Jack when he can love and honor God in his business or at any time. 

    But Jack isn’t marrying anyone. He’s baking a freaking cake. That’s all. 

  390. As I said before, marriage is the first divine law of Christianity. I should have added, as it relates to man because the sun, moon, land, water, and other properties of earth are also divine laws. In fact you can just look at those aspects of creation and know for certain that God created them. A divine law is a universal instruction that implements a constant that can’t be altered. “Thou shalt not…” is an example of laws for man, and they will be broken because of man’s imperfections.

    The reason you are having difficulty understanding these truths is perhaps because you are not a child of God. If And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed does establish human sexuality and when God says male and female should be fruitful and multiply spells it out clearly.

    I’m not sure why you say If that’s true, then it should be illegal for married heterosexual couples to be childless.

    This makes no sense at all since male and female is the only way that anyone from the beginning of time until now got here including you. We know for fact this is true! Zero persons have been produced from a homosexual union. This divine law can’t be broken. Sometimes a beach delivers beautiful views, tranquility and peace. At other times it can deliver a tsunami. That some male and female unions are barren and we have storms and earthquakes are characteristics of their respective universal law. It is part of nature that in no way shape or form diminishes the divine law.

    No one is say that you have to believe in God. What we are saying is that you can’t prevent Jack from loving and honoring God in all that he is and does according to his faith in pursuit of happiness. We already know that the power and glory of God neither increases nor diminishes according to man’s beliefs or disbeliefs. God is sovereign and causes the rain to fall on the just and unjust. The government cannot force Jack to abandon his faith and act against his conscience. For Jack, this is worse than torture because he knows his actions have eternal consequences.

  391. To you it’s a freaking cake. If that’s the case, make your own. To Jack it is a meticulous, intricate design that he creates for celebrations consistent with the first divine law of Christianity, as it relates to man. This is how Jack has chosen to live his life, according to scripture, in pursuit of happiness. And no one can force him to use his talents to service a same-sex event.

  392. Re: “To you it’s a freaking cake.” 

    No, to everyone it’s a freaking cake, because that’s exactly what it is: A freaking cake. 

    Re: “If that’s the case, make your own.” 

    And if that’s the case, let’s put all bakers out of business, because everyone should just bake their own cakes. Right? To be clear, that’s why bakers exist: To bake cakes. Any baker who doesn’t want to bake cakes needs to close up shop and get another job. 

    Re: “To Jack it is a meticulous, intricate design that he creates for celebrations consistent with the first divine law of Christianity, as it relates to man.” 

    No, it’s a freaking cake. Jack baking it does not grant him authority over other people’s lives. Their lives are their own, not his. Got it? 

    Re: “This is how Jack has chosen to live his life, according to scripture, in pursuit of happiness.” 

    There is no scripture governing wedding cakes. None. Not a hint of a whiff of a speck of it. They are not in your scripture — at all! The only thing Jack is “pursuing” is his Christofascist wish to control everyone else’s lives. 

    Re: “And no one can force him to use his talents to service a same-sex event.” 

    No one is making him “service” anything. They hired him to bake a freaking cake — not to run their lives for them. 

  393. Re: “As I said before, marriage is the first divine law of Christianity.” 

    Not according to your Jesus, it’s not! According to your scripture:

    And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. (Mk 12:28-31) 

    Re: “The reason you are having difficulty understanding these truths is perhaps because you are not a child of God.” 

    Yes, that’s right. I haven’t been gifted with all the same great, cosmic, sacred insights you have. Because you and Jack and the rest of your fellow Christofascists are just sooooooo much better and holier than me … right? 

    Congratulations on your superiority complex! You certainly put me in my place. 

    Re: “I’m not sure why you say If that’s true, then it should be illegal for married heterosexual couples to be childless.” 

    My point is obvious, and I stated it clearly. Not my fault that you can’t understand it. (So much for your superior, magical “insight power.”)

    Re: “Zero persons have been produced from a homosexual union. “ 

    What has that got to do with anything? 

    Re: “No one is say that you have to believe in God. “ 

    No, you just want to force everyone to live as though they believe in the exact same God as you. I don’t see that as substantially different. 

    Re: “We already know that the power and glory of God neither increases nor diminishes according to man’s beliefs or disbeliefs.” 

    So why do you care if gays marry? Why should your deity care, either? If this is true, why do you obsess over forcing everyone to live as you demand they live? 

    Re: “The government cannot force Jack to abandon his faith and act against his conscience.” 

    Government does not exist so as to put Jack in control of everyone else’s lives. 

    Re: “For Jack, this is worse than torture because he knows his actions have eternal consequences.” 

    So, Jack will go to hell forever if he bakes a cake that’s used at a gay wedding reception? Really!?? That’s a freaking hilarious assertion! 

  394. I can comprehend why you are like this and I don’t like lies when comes to this either. Thank you for all your information

  395. Ditto!! I’m a true believer and I believe you are too!

  396. Of course Christianity is up for debate. If there was agreement on everything in Christianity there would surely be just one version of the Bible. If there was no debate we’d not have a multitude of produced copies.

    We’d have one denomination, not Baptists and Westboro Baptists, Methodists, and the United Methodist Church, Roman Catholic Church, Church of England, Lutheran, Anglican……..

    There is definitely compromise between denominations.

  397. Christianity has one doctrine of faith, the Holy Bible. The Catholics have the oldest version which contain additional books such as Maccabees and Tobit, and the Apostle Peter is considered the first Pope. How people choose to worship is one thing, but the doctrine of faith was settled long ago at the Council of Nicaea, is not up for sale, debate, or compromise. But if you are a student of scripture, canonical or non-canonical, there are many great reads that I think you will find fascinating! Some that immediately come to mind are the Secrets of Enoch, the Protevangelium, and I and II Infancy. You should look into them if you are interested.

  398. Yes they want to control the argument on false pretenses. They falsely use the bigotry card as a vehicle to falsely latch on to the black civil rights movement and claim they are going through the same thing as blacks.

  399. There are times when bigotry is real. But this is not one of them. Homosexuals have fake “identities” and, imo, it is impossible to discriminate against something that isn’t real. In effect what they are doing is saying that if a person loves God then they are discriminating against homosexuals because homosexuality is a biblical abomination.

  400. I can tell you with 100% certainty that if she had known that gays would later use the courts to persecute Christians for their religious beliefs, she would not have supported you. Today we know that homosexuality is a false ideology and we will not allow ourselves to be deceived. This does not diminish her character in the least, but the homosexuals who tricked her.

  401. Then you deceive yourself which is apparently common place. Christians do not have to bend to the same sex orthodoxy (aka 666) “so we can all co-exist.” That is stupid and it is tyranny. Every Christian has a right to live their life according to their faith without fear of punishment by the government.

  402. You use the term “bigot” so much that people are sick and tired of it and quite frankly it does not ring true with the homosexual agenda. It is impossible to discriminate against something that is fake.

  403. The ones who reject who God created them to be. The ones who lie and say there gender/sex is what they “identify” it to be. The ones who offend and mock God’s laws and celebrate pride in sin. The ones who say children can have two moms or two dads. The ones who steal a child’s right to a mother and a father. The ones who say boys should share bathrooms and showers with girls even though the girls say no. The ones who would dare to counterfeit the image of God in marriage and proclaim same-sex marriage (666) as the new ruling orthodoxy.

  404. Only if you are of the mind that the law is only for the protection and interests of your kind of Christian and nobody else.

    The law is to seek justice and protect the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. You can’t seriously believe that a lie should be protected instead of the truth, do you? If so, you are the one seeking special privileges as I find it very difficult to discriminate against something that isn’t real. In fact, I find it very difficult to find discrimination in anything false, because the homosexual ideology is nothing but a lie. No person should be faulted for telling the truth! When you say, for example, that a man can turn into a woman, that is a lie! Born a male always a male and nothing can change that. We refuse to allow ourselves to be deceived.

    The truth is, as I said before, for Jack who is a Christian, marriage is religious, and is the holy union between a man and a woman. Homosexuality is a biblical abomination as you full well know. Now why in the world would a homosexual go to Jack and request a same sex wedding cake? It seems to me that Jack is the one being discriminated against for his religious beliefs, and no, not everyone agrees with the same sex marriage orthodoxy, aka 666.

    So don’t pretend that your homosexuality is an immutable trait — it isn’t. You should own up to the fact that you are a sexual deviant that opposes Christianity and other faiths because the act of same sex is an abomination and there is nothing you can do to change it.

  405. We are commanded to love our neighbors (which includes folks we consider heretics) as we do ourselves—to treat others the same way we want to be treated. Not “Do unto others as they have done unto you.”

    You couldn’t be a Christian and state this half truth with such confidence and conviction. The truth is we are first commanded to love God with all that we are and in all that we do — that is with your whole heart, your whole soul, and your whole mind. You can’t love God by rejecting His doctrine. And you most certainly can’t skip the first and greatest commandment and jump to the second without a second thought. A real Christian would not miss this, the greatest commandment. And because you did, everything else you say is meaningless.

  406. The Church is central to Black culture. Most are Christian. No Christian, no matter the race, is going to accept the homosexual falsehood that is trying to hijack the Black civil rights movement. I am so glad these leaders took a stand on the matter. That lie has to stop.

  407. It’s ironic that you claim that citing God’s doctrine = “rejecting His doctrine” and a half-truth, as if I’d called it the only commandment we were given.

    That’s bearing false witness as to what I said.

    Even if you disagree with what I actually said rather than the straw man you invented, using a single point of disagreement to dismiss everything that’s said is an ad hominem fallacy. In other words, the logic is invalid—your “argument” is actually propaganda. (If you intended that, fine. If not, you might find benefit in studying logic and syntax.)

    Moreover, you are seeking to hold me to your conscience, in direct violation of I Corinthians 10:29 and Romans 14—which say we’ll have different evaluations/applications of living as a Christian looks like—and implicit violation of both commandments given by Jesus, because you’re putting yourself in the place of God and failing to show your neighbor the same agape as you do yourself.

    The commandment to love God above all else not invalidate or contradict the command to love our neighbor as we do ourselves—in fact, the latter commandment is expressly said to be “like” the prior one, in Matthew 22:39. The command to love God even reinforces the command to love others, because loving God above all else precludes putting ourselves in His place. And the parable of the Good Samaritan, which defines what Jesus meant by “neighbor”, defines that term as referring to even folks we think of as heretics.

    Which is all aside from how, if you dig into the Greek of I Corinthians 13, agape has more to do with respect for other beings than it does with any sort of warm fuzzy feelings.

    Disagreeing with someone does not negate our responsibility as Christians to show them the same courtesy we wish them to show to us.

  408. If your idea of religious freedom is license to attack people in the name of your faith you are in no position to tell anyone what law and justice are.

    You don’t like gays, tough luck. They exist, they have the same rights as you, they are people, they live in the same place as you do. The world doesn’t revolve around your personal bigotry. Your rights end where you attend the rights of others.

    I get it. You are whiny and you want to be treated special and above the law for being Christian. Well its time to grow up.

    You waited more than a week for that tirade? Wasn’t worth the effort. You were better off moving on to another discussion.

  409. You are not refuting the label. In fact you are demonstrating why it is appropriate to call you one in the first place.

    As far as anyone can tell who is not deranged by the existence of gay people, “the homosexual agenda” amounts to living peaceably, not being attacked and discriminated against.

    All you have shown is that you are a thin skinned bigot. You don’t like the label, tough luck.

  410. Dude lay off the posting while intoxicated. That was some major league incoherent rambling.

  411. Yeah, thanks for so clearly demonstrating it. you are definitely not Christian.

  412. Wow! You still miss the meaning of the scripture. When you place God above all things, you can then see clearly how to move on to the second. You are muddled in confusion about the meaning of scripture, and until you put Him first, you are going to remain confused.

    Simply stated, when you accept His word as truth, then you will see clearly that it is not possible to compromise it. To mention a few, God says (Genesis 1:26, 2:24-25, Matthew 19:4) that male and female in His image, should be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, and that when a man leaves his mother and father he should cleave to his wife, thereby establishing the divine order for the family dynamic. We know this to be true because this is how we all got here, including you, and by no other way. Therefore, this union, a man and a woman, is the only one that can satisfy God’s will in marriage and family.

    If we accept these scripture as truth, then it is impossible to interchange as a true “equivalent,” male and male, or female and female, because it would be immediately revealed as a counterfeit since neither can accomplish the will of God. It is evil and false to trick children into believing they can have two moms or two dads. And it would be wrong to reject the scripture and subscribe to the false homosexual ideology that counterfeits the image of God in marriage and family. Rejecting scripture to bend to the same sex orthodoxy is not agape, it is naive because doing so will have eternal consequences.

    Further, God said in Genesis 9:13, that He put the rainbow in place as a symbol of His covenant with man. Homosexuals say the rainbow symbol is used to celebrate gay pride, something that God has called an abomination. Now you can’t be for and against God at the same time. Rejecting the scripture and subscribing to the false gay pride symbol is not agape, it is naivety without reason.

    Also 1 John 4:8 says God is love. However, the same sex orthodoxy has adopted the creed “love is love.” Rejecting scripture and subscribing to the creed of the same sex orthodoxy is not agape, it is naivety without reason.

    To speak the truth regarding scripture does not mean you don’t love your neighbor. It means you will not allow yourself to be deceived as Jesus warned many times over.

  413. How about you take your own advice. The truth hurts sometimes.

  414. It’s not possible to discriminate against imaginary people. For example, I know that born a male always a male and vice versa is a true statement, is it not? If it is a true statement then it would be impossible for me to discriminate if I can only acknowledge the truth, is it not?

  415. As Christians, we know that there are those who oppose Christianity, or disagree with our doctrine of faith. And that’s ok because the first thing God gave us was freedom of choice. Likewise, true Christians disagree with the same sex orthodoxy and it’s ok. No person is forcing you to accept Christianity or “attacking” you in any way. Likewise, homosexuals cannot use the government to punish Christians for their religious beliefs. The government cannot adopt one set of religious beliefs over another.

  416. [lift eyebrows] Yet again, you’ve missed the point of what I said, made assumptions and inserted things I didn’t say at all, and violated Romans 14:3. That’s not even mentioning the potential λοίδορος you’ve engaged in, in both comments, depending on how cognizant you are of your own subtext, like your implication that I as a female ought to shut up.

    Even when you presuppose God’s Word is true—as I do—some texts are definitive, some texts are illustrative, and some things are both. Which are which? That’s where debate and varied applications come from.

    If you want to get literal about syntax, Genesis 1:27 technically says Adam was created both male and female, intersex. This is one of the traditional Jewish interpretations, and it has significant implications on other points where the verse is quoted. It may also be where the Jewish 6 genders come from, but my Hebrew isn’t good enough to confirm that yet.

    Greek uses a lot of assumed nouns—which, by the basic rules of how syntax and logic work (in English as well as Greek), means the noun is carried from what comes before. There are a number of verses that either ignore that or that insert gender where it doesn’t belong, such as in most if not all “If any man” in the New Testament—that’s a Greek turn of phrase that’s actually a gender-neutral “if [some]one” (“εἴ τις”). The phrase used to be more neutral in English, too, so assuming it’s necessarily gendered is inserting modern definitions into historic context.

    Insisting all same-sex “orthodoxy” is “rejecting scripture” demonstrates gross ignorance of the actual arguments made in that position—and you’re also assigning me a position on the topic—making an assumption of my beliefs—that is not what I said or implied.

    People have the right to be treated decently even when we believe them wrong. The parable of the Good Samaritan illustrated that point-blank.

  417. Ignoring scripture isn’t going to make it go away. It is not what you think it ought to say, it says exactly what it means. (Genesis 1:26-28; 2:24-25; 9:13; 19, Leviticus 18:22; 20:13, Romans 1:26-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, 1 Timothy 1:10).

    If you want to get literal about syntax, Genesis 1:27 technically says Adam was created both male and female, intersex.

    It says no such thing! Adam is not even mentioned in Genesis 1:27, yet you somehow came up with a false statement which only proves what I said before, that you are muddled and confused about what the scripture actually says. Genesis 1:26-27 is the creation of the molecular biologic structure and God’s divine order for the human race. Adam was created in Genesis 2, and from that molecular divine order, man has a genetic protein marker delineating male gender/sex.

    In Genesis 2:21-23 we see that God caused a deep sleep to come upon Adam and God removed one of Adam’s ribs and with it He created female, with genetic protein marker delineating female gender/sex. What is important here is that the two together should be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. That is not to say that there are some anomalies that prevent male and female from producing. But that in no way negates God’s will for the human race.

    In the case of Jack Phillips he did treat the couple with respect by kindly informing them that he only custom designs wedding cakes for marriages consistent with the biblical divine order for marriage. Jack does not have to exchange his beliefs for those of another in order to be polite. Comparing the parable of the good Samaritan where a man was robbed, beaten and left for dead on the side of the road, to that of refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same sex ceremony that contradicts his faith is insane. This only proves again what I said before that you are muddled and confused about the meaning of scripture.

  418. I’m not ignoring Scripture. You have, repeatedly.

    And you obviously didn’t check the Aramaic, because Genesis 1:27 explicitly says “adam“, and that’s the only in-text antecedent for the “them” (which is standard in both English and Aramaic for singular persons of undetermined gender). “Adam” does have two meanings—Adam the man, or humankind in general—and both of them fit the context and syntax. If it’s referring to Adam the man, it’s calling him intersex. If it’s referring to mankind in general, it’s just referencing how folks were created—and considering variants sinful is insistent with acceptance of things like various animal breeds, which are not what God originally created.

    Other verses you’re citing have similar issues where you’re ignoring word definitions, syntax, and more. Many verses in Scripture have multiple potential interpretations/applications. Just look at how some folks think war can be justifiable vs. some who think it can never be—those views both pull from Scripture, and Romans 14 both says and illustrates that such differences in interpretation and application are to be expected in the church.

    As for your assumption that I’m somehow condemning Jack Phillips, here:

    [points to context of thread being started with a reply to ’Til Tuesday—which outright quoted the specific text I was replying to: someone’s response to the article, not the article events itself]

    I have no idea how the conversation between Phillips and the couple actually went. Maybe Phillips was kind; maybe he’s just claiming he was. I’ve witnessed and experienced both situations, myself, from fellow Christians. But that’s irrelevant to what I responded to—which I’d even quoted outright, so you’re either picking a fight or being oblivious.

  419. And Muslims teach that Adam laid as a dead man for hundreds of years before God breathed life into him. That is not what is at issue in Jack’s case. God’s kingdom is not divided against itself. The scripture means what it says and there is no confusion. For true Christians like Jack, it is clear that homosexuality is a biblical abomination and that God’s determined purpose for male and female in His image, would be contained within marriage, and would be fruitful and multiply.

    Jack has every right to live his life according to his beliefs and he does not have to exchange his beliefs for those of another, even though they disagree with Jack.

  420. You persist in inserting modern definitions and ignoring the historic ones contemporary to the root translation (“sheqets” has a pretty interesting etymology, actually), and in demonstrating that you failed to comprehend what I actually said.

    I never said Phillips has to exchange his beliefs for anyone, just pointed out that we’re scripturally obligated to be willing to be treated by others the way we’re treating them. The specific application there is that if Jack’s free to refuse to provide a service to the gay couple on account of his beliefs, then others are free to to refuse to provide a service to Christians on account of theirs.

    You had to commit a number of logical fallacies to warp that into what you were arguing against.

  421. Hey thank you for acknowledging these things by responding, I know we have our differences on forgivable ways but I’m so glad you understand how certain people have manipulated civil rights as well as how I mentioned certain people playing the bigotry card accusations is also an excuse to control the argument

  422. lol!!:) Yes we do. It is very hard for me to forgive someone that lies on purpose and attempts to force others to accept it. What they have done with civil rights to falsely equate it with black’s civil rights is almost unthinkable. Now they are claiming to be Christian and want to manipulate the meaning of scripture. But Jesus already warned us ahead of time to see to it that you do not allow yourselves to be deceived. Their lies are never ending.

  423. You want to play a victims because you can’t attack others with impunity?

    Are you kidding me?

    Get bent. You are being a whinybaby.

    I couldn’t care less what you believe or what kind of Christian you are. To each their own. Your mileage may vary. I care about what you do to others. If you want to use your belief as an excuse to attack others, you deserve whatever criticism and scorn you receive.

  424. Bigot wants to pretend the entire class of people they despise and want to attack with impunity under the law does not exist. Riiiight.

    I can’t even pretend you have a view worth taking seriously.

    Gay people exist. 🙂

  425. Despite our differences again with forgiveness my friend and ally, I cannot disagree with a majority of these things regarding what we have spoken about. Let’s not forget whenever a Christian church of any sort starts or anyway supports gay marriage, that is when I start to become disillusioned with that particular church or at least with what has become of it when the allow it in the church, what I have to say is that is despite all I can do as well as am doing my best not judge and as much as it shames me say this… As all I’m seeing for myself at that point is apostasy, as well as disillusionment, just a wolf in sheeps clothing of a church that It once was by straying from its biblical teachings before it was corrupted. As well as opposing it for religious reasons, as I said despite those things, this is also regardless of any kind of religion or any biblical related principles and teaching, though marriage did start off from religion as well as is now civil related contract, it’s both now, now at the same time my point with being regardless of any kind of religion or how anyone else chooses to believe on the contrary, remember that does not make them bad people but they just may not understand either, related to this matter regarding this is also a form of common sense.

  426. A. Remember this that we can’t tell people how to live their lives, we can’t force our religious beliefs nor even beliefs in general on anyone either, and while it is true that we can’t do any of those things to begin with most importantly remember this…that whether or not we can or cannot do these things, regardless, because we don’t need to do any of those things.

  427. B. Although it is true that it may not nor is it any of our business to do these things, my point here is that these certain group of people whom are of the LGBTQs naturally had rights that they already naturally were entitled to and though they are entitled to have their opinions on the contrary, stil regardless of their opinion as well as regardless of how the courts granted it to them as it was NOT even their place to grant them marital rights by the way they did it, because marriage was not even one of them, and they never even where entitled this gay marriage stuff.

  428. C. Although it was legalized in several other states through popular vote, even though it was done through popular vote as much as I hate to admit it that they should not have done that either, my point here is that they brought this problem on theirselves.

  429. D. They not only did this to themselves, by being blinded by their own pride especially from time to time if not affect exactly everything nor exactly every single person in every single way but from time to time as creating potential problems for not only the children they gained the right to adopt as well as other people with religious matters that people are trying to maintain while doing their job if not exactly forcing our religion on them, for stuff that they were not even entitled. Once again though people despite the fact they are entitled to have their differences regarding their opinions, regardless none of these things they say will ever change the fact that just because the courts legalized and made same sex marriage the law of land as that is what tragically if not everyway but in certain ways tragically matters

  430. Sorry I had problems fixing something with my phones typing system

  431. E. As much as what I know to be true with the correct view point that I hold here and that what I also say does not change the fact that it has corruptly as it has inevitably become the law of the land on the 26th of June 2015, lastly regardless of peoples differences in views, opinions, beliefs and this is also regardless of religion as well as regardless of how someone chooses to view, tries to make it appear to themselves as well as anyway trying to tell me my statement here irrelevant as it this statement of mine is relevant, if not relevant in the sense of changing a corrupt law as it does not, most importantly NONE of these things… NONE OF IT REGARDLESS… will ever change the fact that was transpired here should not have in the first place

  432. and they are wonderful people!!! I’m straight but not narrow. I’ve met some amazing, kind, creative, loving people. Glad I’m not hung up on things that Don’t Count.

  433. You are Sick and Tired.
    I’m sick and tired of your tiresome, bigoted tirades. You and others who nothing else do do, apparently, but try to spread their misery onto groups that are struggling enough already. Don’t scapegoat LGBT. Don’t be a mensch.

  434. For me, it means we are talking about how family is treated.

    I have a close relation of my parent’s generation who unnecessarily took 40 years before he came out (worst kept secret in the family). I have a cousin who was practically a little sister to me. She married her girlfriend of 10 years about 2 years ago. It was an adorable ceremony.

    They are lucky for a family that was understanding and living in areas where it was pretty safe to be open (San Francisco, NYC, South Florida). Even my most religious relatives never gave either of them trouble.

    Just as I would never tolerate my own family being treated badly, I would not do so for others in the same situation.

  435. You should be sick and tired of lying and leaching onto the black civil rights movement, falsely accusing Christians of discrimination because of their religious beliefs, lying to children telling them they can have two moms or two dads, lying and faking to be the opposite sex and claiming to be Christian. You should be sick and tired of lying! Tell the truth for a change, why don’t you.

  436. ludicrous….sounds like you are both “sick” and “tired”….
    don’t project your your nonsense onto me.

  437. I agree with you 100%. This law never should have happened because the Biblical law on marriage, Genesis 2:24-25, is written. This means that marriage, even in the courts, must recognize the biblical view. It also appears that the Supreme Court meddled in religious law.

  438. It does matter. It also can be changed. The Supreme Court can and should reverse that decision. If not, they must also find religious liberty is recognized as proper protection for those who believe only in biblical marriage as written. If they fail to do either, the assenting Justices must be removed through impeachment. The People must continue the referendum and vote Republican from top to bottom in each and every single election. Christianity is very much alive and well in our country,

  439. They brought it on themselves and everyone else who only want to adhere to their Christian lifestyle.

  440. And just because a person chooses to live their own life, in every area, according to their faith does not mean they are forcing it on anyone, nor will they accept being forced to exchange their beliefs for those of another. IMO the government has created a same sex religion that should not be forced on everyone.

  441. Jesus knew that the Church would start to embrace that which He called an abomination, homosexuality in particular and same sex marriage, specifically because it counterfeits the image of God in marriage. Leaders of Churches are held to a higher standard because they have begun to mislead entire congregations. Every Christian, especially leaders of the Church, need to read The Book of Revelation to themselves and to their respective congregations. They need to get back to the original teaching of the Gospel.

  442. ????…Sometimes the truth hurts, and don’t read my comments if you don’t want to hear the truth.

  443. the OT/bible says little on homosexuality. It wasn’t even a ‘thing’ then. Jesus says nothing about it. Zilch. Nada. Zero. Get over your obsession. It’s hurting your mental and spiritual health. Jesus sat and ate with the hated tax collector and let a prostitute approach him and anoint his head with oil.
    Would you do any less for the LGBT who are scapegoated and vilified for political reasons by the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church. Those guys who have a penchant for sexually assaulting little children.

  444. With the proper view I have I’m able to agree with you.

  445. Are you aware of how a majority of people these days including the majority of these LGBTQs though not all of them do this which is greatly exaggerate the extent about how were forcing our religion as well as beliefs on them? Like just because we banned gay marriage once did not mean we were forcing our religion or beliefs in other people. Though there were Christian religions that supported the proposition 8, including the LDS church, please don’t call it a cult like a lot of people as well as a lot of Christian religions misinterpret it as, it had nothing to do with religions being forced on other people but it overlaps with common sending in protecting children is part of why we banned. I’m LDS and please don’t forget that either but I would like to tell you I have some talks or news articles that some leaders in our LDS church like Dalin H Oaks as well as some others maybe that I would to use as reference in opposing gay marriage as well as hie they should not be raised in gay marriage either. Another thing please make sure that you understand that Jehovah’s Witness is not a cult either, they are good people but it is just a unique form of Christianity that you know what they do but too much to talk about. I don’t think of any Christian religion as a cult.

  446. “Top Mormon Leader Reaffirms Faith’s Opposition to Gay Marriage” this is still listed on NBC news and this LDS general conference session took place on Saturday September 30th 2017. Look for this
    Article and these people are held in quite the high standards.

  447. The homosexual ideology is loaded with lies and they hurl them left and right. It is not an exaggeration, it is a flat out lie for them to say ‘Christians are using their religion to discriminate’ simply because they live their lives according to their faith. They know full well that homosexuality is a biblical abomination and that the rainbow is symbolic of a divine law. Yet they use it to mock God by celebrating pride in their sin which they know also opposes Christianity.

    It doesn’t matter the denomination or non-denomination a Christian belongs to, what is important is their faith. I think there is something to be learned from all the Churches you named. I only have one issue with Jehova’s Witnesses but it is minor and I enjoy talking with them from time to time.

  448. Yes I’m glade we have a mutual alliance as allies and most importantly we are friends.

  449. A lot of the actual animosity and churlishness toward is just rudeness. All people have dignity and worth. It’s part of Christianity and Judaism. It’s part of my religious humanism. Why some Christians have to be nasty online and in public escapes me. Whatever happened to ‘live and let live’?? When we see LGBT persons scapegoated and even targeted, it’s people being bullies and thugs, IMHO. The end of this is sociopathic thinking.

    We see that here with the sanctimonious acting ‘holier than thou’ and somehow superior to others. What kind of inadequacy or meanness leads people to get obsessed with a minority who are harming no one. I can’t understand it.

    I’ve always been cis-gendered female, and have been in a monogamous marriage for 52 years to a heterosexual man. Why would I want to rain on someone else’s parade?? I’ve talked to couples who had tears in their eyes when they finally married and would have all the benefits of marriage, socially and legally. What is the damn fuss over this?? They work, pay taxes, are good parents, live in communities that benefit from their public service, etc. etc. I just don’t get it.

  450. Well said and straight to the point. There is absolutely nothing I can add to that. My sentiments exactly.

  451. Mutual admiration society here, Spudie!!!. I admire your posts and how you won’t suffer fools gladly. Keep up the good work. Someday the trolls (or enough of them) will get it: the good and the benefits Christianity offers to those who see to the heart of the faith, that is is about loving one another.