Baker forced to make cakes for gay couples

Got a question? We may have some answers!
Forum rules

1) This is a Christian site, respect our beliefs and we will respect yours.

2) This is a family friendly site, no swearing or posting offensive links, pictures, or signatures.

3) Please be respectful of others.

4) Trolls are not welcome and will be dealt with accordingly.

5) No racial comments, jokes or images

6) If you see a dead thread over 6 months old, let it rest in peace

7) No Duplicate posts
User avatar
selderane
Gamer
Gamer
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 6:30 pm
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:
ChickenSoup wrote:Ok, look. I'm not talking about Our Father's Most Chosen Country The United States of America. I'm talking about principles you believe or don't believe to be right. Many of the founding fathers owned slaves, anyway, so there's that. Either way, why should we always have to consider what the founding father would have wanted? They're dead. They had some great ideas, but they also had some pretty bad ones. I would never put their written opinions on a level that is higher than what I believe to be right for the sole fact that "something something Founding Fathers something something America!"

Anyway, look. I'm not sure you're worth talking to. I don't want to trample your condescension party or anything, but I think I've got an idea of how you're going to respond to dissension to your opinion and I quite honestly see no point in discussion this further with you. You're sarcastic and dismissive, and it's painful to read.

Except, there's one last thing I have to address:
It's like you guys have never heard of the principles our nation was founded upon...
Well, some of the founding fathers had slaves. So... not to rain on your condescension parade, but maybe we shouldn't take the words of people who have been dead for 200 years as Gospel?
I've been open and honest with my dealings with you on this topic. That you read that as sarcastic and dismissive is, well, your problem. (There's me being dismissive, I guess... and maybe it's a tad sarcastic for pointing that out too...)

Every objection you've raised I've addressed by stressing the principles of liberty and freedom. You've chosen not to respond on those grounds. So we're not really having a discussion anyway, are we?

As for our Founders: So what? I never said they were perfect. Might I dismiss anything you have to say on moral issues for the shortcomings in your own life? I'm reminded of stones and glass houses...

I'm also reminded of a historian's answer when questioned about how Jefferson, a man so eloquent and passionate in this writings about liberty, could own slaves. His was response was that this was the wrong question to ask. Instead, he said, "We should ask why a southern gentleman of this era was as vehemently anti-slavery as he was?"

Why do you not ask that question? Why do you dismiss the things these men stood for so casually? Their stand literally changed the world and made the entirety of the race freer than it ever had been to that point. So they fell short of the ideal, so what? Show me a man who hasn't.

Stop judging these people by the standards of today. Tell me your own conduct wouldn't likely to be found lacking 200 years from now! Be fair minded for once and judge them instead by the standards of their time. Do that and you will find them to be exceptional by any rational measure.

I have spent a lot of time trying to explain what liberty is, how it works, and why it's should be vigorously defended even in cases we find distasteful. I've given you reading suggestions to learn further.

And I'm sarcastic and dismissive of you? Yeah... one of us is wasting our time and it's not who you think it is.
Bruce_Campbell wrote:
selderane wrote:
Bruce_Campbell wrote:So wait. You want to diminish meaning of the word slavery while using the shock value of the word to bolster your argument?
Since this is the only thing you've latched on to in the many, many words I've written on my argument, I respectfully thank you for your agreement to the larger point I'm making. Because I know you are not one to ignore the larger argument you can readily dismantle with a flick of the wrist to instead be a pedant and nitpick words.

You are trying to make me a better debater, and I salute you.
Eh, I actually don't disagree with you--completely. I just think the term "slavery" is a good example of hyperbole, and I don't see any reason to trot it out except to get a rise out of people. Yes, I think it weakens your argument. More importantly, I don't really know where you stand. Do you think this is as bad as dragging someone away from their home and forcing them to work for you for the rest of their lives, or are you comparing it to a child having to obey his or her parents? It distracts from the issue. (Also, I was on my phone and too lazy to type out a more detailed reply. Sue me. :p)

Back to the original topic... this is a pretty big grey area for me. On one hand, I'm an enthusiastic supporter of gay marriage. I also think that if you're running a public business then you should be willing to serve all of the public, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, whatever. On the other hand, I don't think people should have to participate in something they find morally repugnant, even if I believe that they are wrong. I've been a business owner myself, and as backwards as I personally think this guy is (sorry), he shouldn't have to do something that violates his personal convictions.

I mean, if he was refusing service to this couple only because they were gay, I think this would be a lot more clear cut. I agree that if they were just in there to get a dozen donuts this probably wouldn't be an issue. I think good arguments can be made either way, and I honestly haven't made up my mind.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on my usage of my word. I think it's important and necessary.

I'm glad to see we are truly of an accord on the other points. Regardless of how "backwards" a man's actions are, so far as they do no harm to another man, he ought to be unmolested by anyone.
Everything above this sentence is opinion and worth precisely what was paid for it.
Everything below this sentence is indisputable fact as verified by scientists, philosophers, scholars, clergy, and David Bowie.

If Star Wars: Destiny is a CCG, X-Wing is an LCG.
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
And I'm sarcastic and dismissive of you? Yeah... one of us is wasting our time and it's not who you think it is.
I was talking about how you treated some others, actually.
I have spent a lot of time trying to explain what liberty is, how it works, and why it's should be vigorously defended even in cases we find distasteful. I've given you reading suggestions to learn further.
Thanks, Dad.

But seriously, acting like I'm spitting in your face because I still disagree with you on some point is pretty immature. "HOW COULD YOU NOT AGREE WITH ME, DON'T YOU KNOW HOW AMERICA BECAME AMERICA? ARE YOU UNINFORMED OR JUST IGNORING ME, GUYS."

It's not that I even disagree with a lot of what you have to say. It's just that your arrogance and condescension makes it hard to have a civil discussion.
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
ccgr
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 34700
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: IL
Contact:
has this topic run its course?
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
We're not just done, we're enjoying a hot batch of donion rings
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ChickenSoup wrote:Ok, look. I'm not talking about Our Father's Most Chosen Country The United States of America. I'm talking about principles you believe or don't believe to be right. Many of the founding fathers owned slaves, anyway, so there's that. Either way, why should we always have to consider what the founding father would have wanted? They're dead. They had some great ideas, but they also had some pretty bad ones. I would never put their written opinions on a level that is higher than what I believe to be right for the sole fact that "something something Founding Fathers something something America!"

...

Well, some of the founding fathers had slaves. So... not to rain on your condescension parade, but maybe we shouldn't take the words of people who have been dead for 200 years as Gospel?
So should we take the words of people who have been dead even longer as Gospel, too? You know, like the LITERAL Gospels?

Sorry... but your viewpoint makes me quite sad. :cry: And I fear that it's extremely commonplace. So it's no wonder that I see this nation sliding gradually towards tyranny, and very few people seem to notice, or even worse, care.

But that's derailing the topic even further, so may as well drop that off, too. :wink:
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
So should we take the words of people who have been dead even longer as Gospel, too? You know, like the LITERAL Gospels?

Sorry... but your viewpoint makes me quite sad. :cry: And I fear that it's extremely commonplace. So it's no wonder that I see this nation sliding gradually towards tyranny, and very few people seem to notice, or even worse, care.
We Christians believe the Gospel to be divinely inspired. If you think the Constitution was as well... well, I'm not sure how to respond to that.

What makes you so sad? I don't get it. The founding fathers were not perfect people. Neither are we. We should try for what is best and right, not what the founding fathers thought was best and right.

EDIT: I'm not saying the Constitution, etc., should be rejected. I think that's a source of confusion here. I'm saying that "the founding fathers wanted it" is not a valid defense.
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ChickenSoup wrote:
We Christians believe the Gospel to be divinely inspired. If you think the Constitution was as well... well, I'm not sure how to respond to that.
There are many conservatives and even churches that do believe that. Unsurprisingly, my church is one of those. :)
ChickenSoup wrote:What makes you so sad? I don't get it. The founding fathers were not perfect people. Neither are we. We should try for what is best and right, not what the founding fathers thought was best and right.

EDIT: I'm not saying the Constitution, etc., should be rejected. I think that's a source of confusion here. I'm saying that "the founding fathers wanted it" is not a valid defense.
As you likely know, the U.S. Government consists of three parts - executive, legislative and judicial. The judicial portion is the one that we should focus on for this part, because it's their job to determine what laws are or are not Constitutional - the document that the Founding Fathers created. So it is very important to keep in mind what the Founding Fathers set out to do, and why. Keep in mind that they had just spent several years shaking off one tyrannical government, and scrabbled hard to find some form of government that actually worked. Just dismissing them as a "bunch of dead guys" who had no clue as to what would happen 200 years later is what makes me sad.

(Incidentally, Ginsburg has also cited foreign judgments and courts in some of the opinions that she's written for the Supreme Court. That makes me sad, too. She shouldn't be considering what OTHER governments are doing - her scope needs to be limited to what the Constitution says and what the drafters of the Constitution intended when it was written.)
User avatar
ccgr
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 34700
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: IL
Contact:
I believe that the USA was blessed by God as it was a nation that acknowledged Him, but I don't find the constitution divine. Good but not Godly. This nation has been wiping away traces of God from it for a while. We're not listed as a nation in the end times...not sure what's going to happen and when to seal our fate.
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
I'm not saying that they weren't great men, but inevitably we are going to run I to problems they couldn't have possibly foreseen, and we should focus on doing what is right in those situations and how we should act (within the bounds of the constitution) rather than look back and try to imagine how they would have responded.

This view has absolutely nothing to do with my political leanings. I oppose tyranny strongly.

Also, I'm not sure how to respond to the divinely inspired constitution comment. I don't think that's really a view that is held anywhere outside the US (unsurprisingly) and it strikes me as a little over-patriotic. Unless, of course, you mean that you're claiming that the founding fathers prayed for wisdom before signing it, in which case I wouldn't disagree.

If you're claiming that it has a level close to or equal to the veracity of scripture, well, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'd oppose it entirely.

Sorry if I misunderstand what you're expressing. There might be a source of confusion from what divinely inspired entails in regard to this. Semantics, yes, but necessary for understanding in this case :P
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ChickenSoup wrote:I'm not saying that they weren't great men, but inevitably we are going to run I to problems they couldn't have possibly foreseen, and we should focus on doing what is right in those situations and how we should act (within the bounds of the constitution) rather than look back and try to imagine how they would have responded.
And now we've come full circle! Let's look at the topic in question - do some believe that the courts are "right" in forcing a man to support a practice he disagrees with on religious grounds? Obviously, some do. However, is forcing someone to do something against their will and religion Constitutional? And if they disagree they need to be "re-educated?" I would say no. Ultimately it would have to be left up to the Supreme Court, but from my perspective, this would be a strong violation of both the freedom of religion and the right to free assembly, and the lower court's decision should be reversed.
ChickenSoup wrote: Also, I'm not sure how to respond to the divinely inspired constitution comment. I don't think that's really a view that is held anywhere outside the US (unsurprisingly) and it strikes me as a little over-patriotic. Unless, of course, you mean that you're claiming that the founding fathers prayed for wisdom before signing it, in which case I wouldn't disagree.

If you're claiming that it has a level close to or equal to the veracity of scripture, well, we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'd oppose it entirely.
I don't think there are any churches that equate the Constitution with scripture (I might be wrong about that...). But some would say that God's hand was involved in forming it because it was part of His plan that this nation be founded on the principles that made it strong, rather than simply copying a lot of the other established governments at the time.

If you're interested in reading further about this concept, consider reading "The 5,000 Year Leap" by Cleon Skousen. It makes an interesting argument for the founding of this nation to be encouraged by Heavenly Father.
ccgr wrote:This nation has been wiping away traces of God from it for a while. We're not listed as a nation in the end times...not sure what's going to happen and when to seal our fate.


One could make an argument that it isn't listed because it didn't exist at the time Revelation was written... or it could be a sign that it won't exist by the time the end times come. Time will tell....
User avatar
Wildebear
Regular Member
Regular Member
Posts: 112
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 1:49 pm
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: South Africa
Contact:
ccgr wrote:I believe that the USA was blessed by God as it was a nation that acknowledged Him, but I don't find the constitution divine. Good but not Godly. This nation has been wiping away traces of God from it for a while. We're not listed as a nation in the end times...not sure what's going to happen and when to seal our fate.
I think all history is driven to one converging point. Nations don't really matter in God's eyes as there is only one kingdom. However we may romanticise our own ideas and creations,we as Christians have to acknowledge that it'll all decay and turn to dust. I think God definitely intervened in your history. Just look at George Washington.
“Conquer yourself rather than the world.”
― René Descartes
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
Sstavix wrote:
ChickenSoup wrote:I'm not saying that they weren't great men, but inevitably we are going to run I to problems they couldn't have possibly foreseen, and we should focus on doing what is right in those situations and how we should act (within the bounds of the constitution) rather than look back and try to imagine how they would have responded.
And now we've come full circle! Let's look at the topic in question - do some believe that the courts are "right" in forcing a man to support a practice he disagrees with on religious grounds? Obviously, some do. However, is forcing someone to do something against their will and religion Constitutional? And if they disagree they need to be "re-educated?" I would say no. Ultimately it would have to be left up to the Supreme Court, but from my perspective, this would be a strong violation of both the freedom of religion and the right to free assembly, and the lower court's decision should be reversed.
I wasn't really talking about the case of the gay wedding cake, I was speaking more generally, i.e. "How do we settle funding disputes with colonization of exoplanets and possible claims disputes on those planets?" "WELL, WHAT WOULD GEORGE WASHINGTON DO?" Well, We can speculate on a general level what he would do (since he wouldn't understand most of the concepts and just understand the basic needs of a country/planet/species to act) ORRRR we can act of our own volition and understanding and wisdom and intelligence.
I don't think there are any churches that equate the Constitution with scripture (I might be wrong about that...). But some would say that God's hand was involved in forming it because it was part of His plan that this nation be founded on the principles that made it strong, rather than simply copying a lot of the other established governments at the time.
Well, that's different than what was implied earlier. God having a hand in something is much different than a text being considered divinely inspired.

Perhaps this would be the basis of another thread?
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ChickenSoup wrote: I wasn't really talking about the case of the gay wedding cake, I was speaking more generally, i.e. "How do we settle funding disputes with colonization of exoplanets and possible claims disputes on those planets?" "WELL, WHAT WOULD GEORGE WASHINGTON DO?" Well, We can speculate on a general level what he would do (since he wouldn't understand most of the concepts and just understand the basic needs of a country/planet/species to act) ORRRR we can act of our own volition and understanding and wisdom and intelligence.
Oddly enough, in the example you gave, I think George's opinion would be useful. After all, he's had extensive experience with colonization and claims over territory. Given enough knowledge, he could probably come up with some stunningly effective agricultural practices for said exoplanets, too.

Now if we're talking about digital rights in terms of the electronic distribution of video games... that's a topic that might leave him scratching his head. ;) Better to call in Ben Franklin for that one....
ChickenSoup wrote:
I don't think there are any churches that equate the Constitution with scripture (I might be wrong about that...). But some would say that God's hand was involved in forming it because it was part of His plan that this nation be founded on the principles that made it strong, rather than simply copying a lot of the other established governments at the time.
Well, that's different than what was implied earlier. God having a hand in something is much different than a text being considered divinely inspired.
This is varying significantly from the topic, but do you think that it's possible for works to be divinely inspired that aren't a part of a religious text?
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
Oddly enough, in the example you gave, I think George's opinion would be useful. After all, he's had extensive experience with colonization and claims over territory. Given enough knowledge, he could probably come up with some stunningly effective agricultural practices for said exoplanets, too.

Now if we're talking about digital rights in terms of the electronic distribution of video games... that's a topic that might leave him scratching his head. ;) Better to call in Ben Franklin for that one....
Well, perhaps. I'll give you that one :P I dunno about agriculture on exoplanets; it'd depend on the atmosphere, etc. (assuming there are "habitable/colonizable" planets that are not necessarily "human-friendly" without gear, e.g. Mars) BUT ANYWAY I DIGRESS.
This is varying significantly from the topic, but do you think that it's possible for works to be divinely inspired that aren't a part of a religious text?
Once again, I think you'll have to define what you mean by divinely inspired. I don't mean to argue semantics or be meticulous and pick over your words, but I ask because there's a lot at stake, so to speak. If we start attributing that weight to it, it potentially starts to become unquestionable. I think that some of the founding fathers could have prayed for God's guidance in forming it and amending it, yes. Do I think it was any degree of direct inspiration (i.e. "All right gents, these are the words God told me to write")? No, no I don't.

I will answer your more general question (that is, is it possible for man-made works to be divinely inspired) once you define what you mean by it. Verbal plenary inspiration? Some kind of general guidance by the Holy Spirit to write something? A quick prayer before writing something? Any combination of those?
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ChickenSoup wrote: Once again, I think you'll have to define what you mean by divinely inspired. I don't mean to argue semantics or be meticulous and pick over your words, but I ask because there's a lot at stake, so to speak.
Makes sense - after all, your definition could differ from my own.
ChickenSoup wrote: I will answer your more general question (that is, is it possible for man-made works to be divinely inspired) once you define what you mean by it. Verbal plenary inspiration? Some kind of general guidance by the Holy Spirit to write something? A quick prayer before writing something? Any combination of those?
I think it could be a combination of any of those. It may be someone saying that he or she just let God move the hands and crafted the work from that. It could be a stray, unbidden thought that developed into something wonderful. It may even be something commissioned by a church to create.

In case you didn't know, I am firmly of the belief that God speaks to every single one of us. It's been one of my longest, strongly-held beliefs. The only issue is that most of us don't know how to hear Him (and, sadly, some seem to deliberately ignore Him). I think that those who are receptive to the Spirit and try to follow its promptings can indeed make works of art (not just written works, but painting, sculpture, music, and other forms of artistic expression) that are lasting and truly wonderful. Others may not be actively seeking God's guidance, but somehow are affected or moved by the Spirit to further His work, whether they know it or not. (One example that comes to my mind - and this is just my opinion - could be found in Carl Sagan's work "Contact." Ellie's experiences by the end of the book - or the movie - capture the spiritual experience perfectly. She KNOWS to the core of her being that something truly profound has happened, but has absolutely no way to prove it or convince others of what she has experienced. Keep in mind that Carl Sagan is an atheist - so why would he write about such an event that mirrors what a lot of us have experienced when we feel God watching over us?)
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests