(October 6, 2017 at 1:04 pm)Divinity Wrote: If tyrants like neo had their way, gay people would be flogged in public.

Defends Free Speech rights of artists = Tyannt
Wants Government to compel artists to create = Freedom Fighter

Divinity, you are so fucked-up and twisted that you don't even realize that you are advocating State control over artistic production.

(October 6, 2017 at 1:41 pm)Divinity Wrote: Always funny to see people use 'moral convictions' to justify discrimination.

How many of these good Christian folks deny people a wedding cake because it's their second marriage?  Or third?  Isn't divorce supposed to be against their moral convictions?  Yet you NEVER hear these wedding cake fuckers saying they can't sell a cake to someone on their second or third wedding.  As long as it's not to someone of the same sex, they're Aok with it.

Funny how that works.  

Moral convictions are just an excuse.  And a pretty fucking poor one at that.

I think it's funny, how this has nothing to do with what anyone said.  Just a distraction from the issue.

Do you think that freedom of speech only applies to those you agree with?

(October 6, 2017 at 1:41 pm)Divinity Wrote: Always funny to see people use 'moral convictions' to justify discrimination.

How many of these good Christian folks deny people a wedding cake because it's their second marriage?  Or third?  Isn't divorce supposed to be against their moral convictions?  Yet you NEVER hear these wedding cake fuckers saying they can't sell a cake to someone on their second or third wedding.  As long as it's not to someone of the same sex, they're Aok with it.

Funny how that works.  

Moral convictions are just an excuse.  And a pretty fucking poor one at that.

Most Christian denominations are ok with remarriage after a divorce. Catholics are not unless the first marriage was annulled, but protestants are generally ok with remarriage after a divorce. 

So I guess there could be 3 possibilities for what you're saying above:

1. The Christian baker doesn't have a problem with remarriage after divorce

2. The Christian baker doesn't know this is their client's 2nd or 3rd marriage (because how would they?)

3. The Christian baker is against remarriage after divorce, knows his client is getting married for the 2nd time, but has more of a problem with gay marriage due to a prejudice against gays (which is what you're suggesting) 

...So it could be for any one of those 3 reasons that we don't hear about Christian bakers turning down service for a person's 2nd wedding. Assuming it's always because of the 3rd reason is a little unfair.

Doesn't matter who is and isn't OK with remarriage following divorce since Jesus isn't OK with it.


This Religion 101 moment has been brought to you by your Vorlon, proudly instructing the religious in the very basic fundamentals of their faith(s) for over 10 years.

(October 6, 2017 at 2:11 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: Doesn't matter who is and isn't OK with remarriage following divorce since Jesus isn't OK with it.


This Religion 101 moment has been brought to you by your Vorlon, proudly instructing the religious in the very basic fundamentals of their faith(s) for over 10 years.

The thing is, when Jesus mentioned divorce and remarriage, he was talking to the men in his social circle. Back then, it was a common thing for Jewish men to get married just so they could have sex and then turn around and divorce their wife and go marry someone else to have sex with... and so on. Divorcing and remarrying was their way of "playing the field" back then, and using women. Jesus was telling the men this doesn't fly. That's why the Church does allow remarriage but only if certain strict criteria are met and the first marriage can be annulled.

My Bible shows no asterisk there, my dear.

(October 6, 2017 at 2:04 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Defends Free Speech rights of artists = Tyannt
Wants Government to compel artists to create = Freedom Fighter

Divinity, you are so fucked-up and twisted that you don't even realize that you are advocating State control over artistic production.

I'm not the fucked up one.  That'd be you, fucknuts.  

State control over artistic production would be the state saying what is and isn't okay to do artistically.  But I don't expect you to understand that because you're so fucking stupid that I'm surprised you know how to get out of bed in the morning without breaking every limb in your goddamn body.  

 Writing names on a goddamn cake has fuck all to do with artistic expression.  If you're willing to write names on a cake, you should write them on there regardless of what sex or gender they are.  To do otherwise is DISCRIMINATION.  You're like "Oh to write it on there would be to say PISS ON CHRIST!"  (And given the chance, I would totally piss on Christ.  Fuck Jesus.  He's a fucking asshole.  Especially if his shitty followers are anything to go by )  But the two aren't comparable at all, because you can easily have a rule and guideline that does not discriminate against anyone that offensive language isn't used on your cakes.  So you wouldn't do a cake with PISS ON MOHAMMED or PISS ON JESUS.  To do otherwise would be discriminating against one group. But you can't have a rule or guideline that isn't discriminatory that allows you to write "John and Jane" but not "john and Jack".  It's discriminatory by nature.  

This isn't fucking hard to understand.  Of course in the end it's never about artistic expression anyway.  It's all about privilege.  It's not about their moral code.  It has fuck all to do with that, because they'll gladly do a muslim cake, they'll make a cake for someone on their 18th wedding for all the fuck they care.  No matter how much these other people go against their beliefs, they'll continue to fucking do business with them.  But as soon as it's a gay couple?  Suddenly that's where their convictions really stick in.  Mostly because they're really fucking shitty people who need another group to hate on.  Because when it comes down to it, hate is all they have.  It's discrimination plain and simple.  And that you don't want to see that--it says a lot about what kind of person you are.  And that's a really fucking shitty one.

---

(October 6, 2017 at 2:09 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: 2. The Christian baker doesn't know this is their client's 2nd or 3rd marriage (because how would they?)

Maybe they should fucking ask, since it's so fucking important to them that they not do a gay wedding.  But doing a wedding for a second or third or fourth or fifth marriage?  Apparently that doesn't bother them.  Mostly because their moral convictions are nothing but an excuse for their discriminatory behavior.  They're using their religion as a shield.  That this doesn't bother religious people is pretty damning.

(October 6, 2017 at 2:28 pm)Divinity Wrote: ...fucked up ...fucknuts...fucking stupid...goddamn...fuck all...I would totally piss on Christ.  Fuck Jesus....fucking asshole...shitty...fucking ...fuck all...fuck...fucking ...fucking shitty people..fucking shitty...fucking...fucking...

LOL It's like she just learned how to use swear words.

(October 6, 2017 at 2:11 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: Doesn't matter who is and isn't OK with remarriage following divorce since Jesus isn't OK with it.

...except in the case of sexual immorality, which He clearly specified.

LOL. It's like you have no response. Oh wait, it's not LIKE that, it IS that. Which is why you focus on saying 'bad words' instead of having a fucking argument.

(October 6, 2017 at 2:28 pm)Divinity Wrote:

(October 6, 2017 at 2:04 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Defends Free Speech rights of artists = Tyannt
Wants Government to compel artists to create = Freedom Fighter

Divinity, you are so fucked-up and twisted that you don't even realize that you are advocating State control over artistic production.

I'm not the fucked up one.  That'd be you, fucknuts.  

State control over artistic production would be the state saying what is and isn't okay to do artistically.  But I don't expect you to understand that because you're so fucking stupid that I'm surprised you know how to get out of bed in the morning without breaking every limb in your goddamn body.  

 Writing names on a goddamn cake has fuck all to do with artistic expression.  If you're willing to write names on a cake, you should write them on there regardless of what sex or gender they are.  To do otherwise is DISCRIMINATION.  You're like "Oh to write it on there would be to say PISS ON CHRIST!"  (And given the chance, I would totally piss on Christ.  Fuck Jesus.  He's a fucking asshole.  Especially if his shitty followers are anything to go by )  But the two aren't comparable at all, because you can easily have a rule and guideline that does not discriminate against anyone that offensive language isn't used on your cakes.  So you wouldn't do a cake with PISS ON MOHAMMED or PISS ON JESUS.  To do otherwise would be discriminating against one group. But you can't have a rule or guideline that isn't discriminatory that allows you to write "John and Jane" but not "john and Jack".  It's discriminatory by nature.  

This isn't fucking hard to understand.  Of course in the end it's never about artistic expression anyway.  It's all about privilege.  It's not about their moral code.  It has fuck all to do with that, because they'll gladly do a muslim cake, they'll make a cake for someone on their 18th wedding for all the fuck they care.  No matter how much these other people go against their beliefs, they'll continue to fucking do business with them.  But as soon as it's a gay couple?  Suddenly that's where their convictions really stick in.  Mostly because they're really fucking shitty people who need another group to hate on.  Because when it comes down to it, hate is all they have.  It's discrimination plain and simple.  And that you don't want to see that--it says a lot about what kind of person you are.  And that's a really fucking shitty one.

---

(October 6, 2017 at 2:09 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: 2. The Christian baker doesn't know this is their client's 2nd or 3rd marriage (because how would they?)

Maybe they should fucking ask, since it's so fucking important to them that they not do a gay wedding.  But doing a wedding for a second or third or fourth or fifth marriage?  Apparently that doesn't bother them.  Mostly because their moral convictions are nothing but an excuse for their discriminatory behavior.  They're using their religion as a shield.  That this doesn't bother religious people is pretty damning.

I'm sure they don't ask their clients if they are marrying someone of the same sex, either. It's one of those things where it's only if they happen to find out.