Author Wants Southern States To Secede Over Gay Rights, Name New Country 'Reagan'

[Not a Tailor 1,370]

I would never expect anyone to leave their home unwillingly, but at the same time if you're life takes you down a path that has limited support in that area, should you handle it by forcing your beliefs onto a people or relocating to an area that your lifestyle is fully supported in all areas. I love when people who are die-hard supporters of gay rights use the statement "They should be free to pursue their lives how they see fit." It leads me right into the following questions;

Is one persons freedom more important than another persons? By forcing a general population of a state or community to accept a practice that is against its general beliefs, you have therefore stripped the freedoms of those people of being able to uphold their freedom of religion and freedom of speech. There are tons and tons of examples of companies with Christian values (Just using Christians as an example) who are being forced to pay fines, defamed, or even shut down due to the "Our way or no way" attitude of equal rights activists. It's very ironic. If someone doesn't accept your life choices, then they are somehow bigots or uncivilized and should therefore be punished...Oops, that sounds like an equal rights issue right there on it's own.

Or is it? I grew up in a region where the shape of my facial features meant that, when my friends went into stores, I was followed, had my jackets and bags taken from me, was questioned and sometimes asked to wait outside when shop keepers claimed a fictional cap on the number of students allowed in the store that varied based on how many of my Anglo Saxon friends were there wanting to go in. They did not make it outright impossible to shop there. They just made it increasingly difficult for me to do so until I finally resorted to having my friends buy me what I wanted and not shopping at all. I was often even left at home for grocery shopping by my mother to make things easier.

But they held a strong, deeply held belief that people who looked like me were drunken thieves. So I guess that what they did is okay, by your books? I mean, it's their beliefs and it's the will of a region, right?

Shall we allow laws that prevent two unrelated, unmarried adults from living in a house with children to whom they are not both related ? This, by the way, is an actual thing. There were, and may still be, municipalities which, in the US, have worked so hard to prevent homosexuals from being legally able to live in their towns that they passed this bylaw. But no one is trying to make homosexuals leave their homes, right?

Does the pursuit of happiness mean nothing to people who are being forced to accept that which they do not believe or approve in? I mean, do you seriously not think that forcing our children, and let's even say elderly, to accept this kind of lifestyle is acceptable?

Why wouldn't I? First, it's not a life style. My wife and I have a dog and a cat, joint bank accounts and a home in planning to move into a son as this visa mess is sorted. We like to snuggle on the couch and watch movies and cook delicious food. How does that diet from a heterosexual marriage? Note, please, before you say 'sex' that you do not know what happens in our bedroom anymore than I know what happens in any other couple's bedroom. There is a great diversity of human sexuality. Some people are into things that seem strange, like bringing food into the bed. It's not my thing, personally, but it's not my place to judge and I'm honestly not interested. Why are those who are against marriage equality so interested in the bedroom habits of same sex couples?

Second. Same sex relationships being acceptable saves lives. When you have a social climate that dictates that loving someone of the same sex as yourself is bad, teenagers kill themselves rather than come out. Parents send their children to abusive camps that call themselves schools under the guide of changing the child or saving the family the shame. Children find themselves on the streets when their parents kick them out. Only a small percentage of teens are gay. A much, much higher percentage of gay teens are homeless. It is disproportionate.

Are anti equality activists in favour of teen homelessness?

What do activists do to those they cannot force their ways on? Harass, discriminate, protest, embarrass, and even humiliate until they get what they want. That is how things work right now. I know what you are trying to say, but at the same time, when an activist cannot win their case with simple reason, then they turn as aggressive as necessary to force their will upon the public. And do people have the right not to be harassed and discriminated against activists because they do not choose to accept their way of life?

What you refer to as activists discriminating is honestly just activism. These are the tactics of both sides. When you want people to listen to you, you kick up a fuss. You talk to the media. You seek support for your side. You make petitions. This is all part of something called protest. Protest is important to the forward motion of society. It is also always condemned by the status quo. You can see examples of similar villainizing throughout all of human history. Look at the writing of Jonathan Swift, in his modest proposal. If that isn't demonizing the ruling class through satire, I don't know what is.

Do I condone death threats and vandalism? Absolutely not. Do I deny that these things happen? No. But it is important to remember that, just like only a small minority of those calling themselves Christian protest funerals, activists who commit acts such as this are a tiny minority. Perhaps one or two out of thousands. I do not condemn all Christians for the actions of a few. Why are all gay activists condemned?

Anti-gay laws protected a general populations similar idea of the value of marriage and what it was. For a long time, families (at least in the south) thrived on strength of family and treated marriage and courtship at a very high standard. That is being slowly destroyed now, and not by the will of the people.

Then why are divorce rates higher in states where a higher proportion of people define themselves as Christian?

So, if someone is a bigot because you cannot force your ideology on them, what does that make you for calling them a bigot and un-accepting and harassing them?

It's a two way street that will never end....

It can end.

I have to ask. You speak of forcing ideology on people. On how the majority not wanting something should make it not happen. When has the will of the majority ever been meant to oppress the minority? Because that is what happens when I can't get health insurance through a person I am legally married to, as a small example . The will of the majority is oppressing me and that's not what democracy ever intended to happen. That way lies a great number of things in American history that I'm sure you would rather were not revisited.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again, the double standard I've mentioned several times. These "Bigoted busybodies" do not consider a marital union between he same sex an appropriate manner, who is anyone to tell them that their religious entity is wrong and they are terrible people for preserving what they see is a good deed when it is their time to come to judgement? They didn't slander them, beat them, no hate crimes, they simply stood by their faith and did not let someone put a gun to their head to get what they wanted.

Again, two way street, never going to end...

The double standard only exists in your mind.

Again, a person's personal, private beliefs are their own. Noone is forcing anyone to believe anything.

The issue here is that those people couldn't separate their private beliefs from the running of their business. The result of that is that they abused the freedoms of one of their customers.

There was nothing stop them selling the cake and letting the couple get on with their lives while they did the same. After all, isn't that what happens on a daily basis - how much do you know about the people you buy goods and services from? For all you know, the person who checks you out at the supermarket could harbour a hatred of immigrants, blacks and jews.

So what? As long as they do their job, what they believe is none of your business.

[AnnaMaria 68]

If you buy a product from Amazon, do you think they care about whether or not you are gay? Does that enter into the transaction process - is there a checkbox you have to tick before you submit your order to indicate that you aren't gay? If not, why?

BECAUSE IT IS NOT RELEVANT!!!

Why couldn't the people in the cake shop not just sell the cake and mind their own business? I'm really struggling to understand why you can't grasp that idea. They created the situation, not the lesbians. In what whacked out world does the person who does something wrong and indefensible get classifed as the victim?

Noone has to approve of homosexuality. All that I'm saying is that in a public setting you shouldn't use your privately held beliefs to infringe on the freedoms of others.

Well, your first set of questions is simple. That is because Amazon removes the human element from the experience and it is between a person and a computer. From the moment you order until the moment you check out, there is not direct need for contact between people other than shipping and receiving. They asked this couple to BAKE a cake, told them it was for a wedding they felt was against their moral values, and then were practically forced out of business for standing by their beliefs. I mean, if apologetically refusing to back down from what you believe in constitutes harm in any way, I could see your point, but they simply refused. The wake that followed is in fact due to the lesbians disrespect of the couples religious belief's and that there rights were somehow superior to the couples.

I believe you when you say that no one has to approve of homosexuality, however the Supreme Court disagrees when they stated that a few major family owned businesses were not required to provide contraceptives to females due to their religious viewpoints on abortion. So unfortunately, this point is kind of moot until their is a universal agreement or disagreement on the matter in a court of law.

Let me ask you this, I can tell you strongly disapprove of people who hold strong religious fundamentals in their belief's of a marital union, but lets talk about the customers ordering the cake. You said that the bakery owners were wrong for upholding a stance on their religion, they are bigots and wrong. Will there ever be a point when the consumer can just say "I respect your religious beliefs and appreciate your time" and find another bakery that doesn't care less and is all about the buck?

I think people's personal opinion means a lot in this world, especially in the US. If people didn't stand by what they believed in, we would not have endured so much as a country. Standing by our personal beliefs made this nation what it is today, and i'm talking about this from my ancestor's point of view. If people keep getting told that what they personally believe and stand by has no value, people soon will have no hope at all.

Edited October 24, 2014 by AnnaMaria

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

It is not about refusing service, it is about participating in an act that a person believes is immoral. I can post some links to as many bible passages as you would like stating why Christians find marriage to be a marital union between a man and a union, but I'm pretty sure everyone knows them by now.

When Jesus walked among men and women, did he shun those who sinned?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It is not about refusing service, it is about participating in an act that a person believes is immoral. I can post some links to as many bible passages as you would like stating why Christians find marriage to be a marital union between a man and a union, but I'm pretty sure everyone knows them by now.

If you're in a cake shop to buy a cake and you can't because the owners of the shop tell you that they don't approve of homosexuality then it absolutely is about refusing service... because you're in there to buy a freaking cake, not go to a church service...

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Shouldn’t Christians treat all people with respect, regardless of their sexual orientation? Absolutely. The Bible says: “Honor men of all sorts” or, as Today’s English Version renders it, “Respect everyone.” (1 Peter 2:17) Therefore, Christians are not homophobic. They show kindness to all people, including those who are gay.—Matthew 7:12.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well, your first set of questions is simple. That is because Amazon removes the human element from the experience and it is between a person and a computer. From the moment you order until the moment you check out, there is not direct need for contact between people other than shipping and receiving. They asked this couple to BAKE a cake, told them it was for a wedding they felt was against their moral values, and then were practically forced out of business for standing by their beliefs. I mean, if apologetically refusing to back down from what you believe in constitutes harm in any way, I could see your point, but they simply refused. The wake that followed is in fact due to the lesbians disrespect of the couples religious belief's and that there rights were somehow superior to the couples.

I believe you when you say that no one has to approve of homosexuality, however the Supreme Court disagrees when they stated that a few major family owned businesses were not required to provide contraceptives to females due to their religious viewpoints on abortion. So unfortunately, this point is kind of moot until their is a universal agreement or disagreement on the matter in a court of law.

People work for amazon, not robots. Those people have views and the odds are pretty good that I won't agree with a few of them. So what? It's not relevant. Like any business - the goal is sell goods and services.

Do your job and keep your personal beliefs separate. I don't see why that is so difficult.

[JohnR! 5,495]

If the apocrypha contains any truth, JC hung out with the 12 undesirables, and an alleged prostitute in tow. You do the math.

What many seem to not understand is that most christians want absolutely nothing to do with the 'teachings' of Jesus. The purpose of christianity is to give them a perceived high ground from which to judge and hate everyone else who's not like them. The self denominated 'religion of love' is anything but.

Meanwhile it flies in the face of christianity that many of these bigots are on their second or third marriages. Go f...ing figure!

When Jesus walked among men and women, did he shun those who sinned?

[AnnaMaria 68]

Well, perhaps everything is just going to play out over time. We've gone from a world that had the need live in communities that worked together, share the same fundamental ideas, and support each others differences. Times have changed, people have matured (or so they think), and we have lost focus of why we are here and why we stand together. We lost so much time in history learning to honor human rights, now I suppose it is the time equal rights gets organized into the human experience. Every human on this Earth should have the right to earn respect based on the choices they make in their life. Color of skin, sexuality, and non-violent religious belief's should not be based on the earning of that respect. Unfortunately, our civilization advanced so far in the past 1000 years that we're basically in a whirlpool trying to figure out what is best for mankind.

Hey, worst come to worst, they're supposed to be colonizing Mar's in some years, maybe we'll see how things run up there with a somewhat fresh start and apply those lessons back home

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Please show me where it says in the bible it's okay to refuse service to a homosexual couple.

It doesn't. It simply denounces the practice altogether. Doesn't mention food at all. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah comes to mind. As do passages from Leviticus:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Well you have to be creative to get around the word filter

I'm pretty sure that "trying to get around the word filter" is a violation of the TOS, is it not?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

It doesn't. It simply denounces the practice altogether. Doesn't mention food at all. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah comes to mind. As do passages from Leviticus:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

And by not serving them a cake, does that equate to the act of homosexuality?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm pretty sure that "trying to get around the word filter" is a violation of the TOS, is it not?

You need to get out more.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Serving cake to gays would be the equivalent of JC coming to the rescue of an adulteress just before a crowd was scheduled to stone her. He'd never do that! As if!

And by not serving them a cake, does that equate to the act of homosexuality?

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

You need to get out more.

Thanks, Doc.