Very much a 'dodge'/'evade' sort of answer. People can and do distort the writings of the Bible (or any other respected text) in an attempt to justify their own wants or goals. That does not mean the written text actually implies the distorted conclusion.
What I have said is not simply an opinion, it is a fact. The Bible (specifically the Christian Bible) does not command purity of the races as a generalized concept. There is nothing more to say here unless you are willing to provide justification for your assertion it does so beyond someone somewhere said they could do it.
The fact some people ABUSE a text cannot be used as a summary of the content of that same text. Otherwise, it would be fair to say Darwin supported Hitlers Eugenics. Or that YECs have good arguments for an Earth <10,000 years old.
No - they can't. This is, again, simply a disingenuous and intellectually empty dismissal of the Bible base on your own prejudice against it.
You can't get out of the real conflict this way. Simply putting quotes around one instance of the word freedom and not around the other! Really? The freedom to the free exercise of religion is guaranteed by the constitution. The conflict that arises here is real and you need to step up to the plate and acknowledge it ... unless you prefer deceptive and disingenuous arguments and debates.
Simply not true. For a person to be forced to violate the moral principles of their religion is to deny them the right to the free exercise of their religion - which I repeat is guaranteed by the US Constitution.
It you say it a million times it will not make it correct. Taking your cues from Donald Trump?
While sexual-orientation might* be an inherited trait, sexual actions and practices are choices and subject to almost all religious moral codes. There is no discrimination against anyone's sexual orientation. However, what does exist here is the attempt to force a person to violate their religion's moral code as regards certain types of sexual action and thus restrict their right to follow and obey their religions teachings. Specifically, you want to force a man to design and create a symbol of a marriage which sanctions same-sex actions which according to a straight-forward reading of both Old and New testament texts are forbidden.
All bakers? How do you know that? And how do you know this baker does not in fact refuse to make such cakes? He refuses to make Halloween cakes or cakes made from or celebrating alcoholic revelry. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he refused to make cakes for remarrying divorces unless the met the exceptions defined in the Bible. To the point. He refuses to make any cake that violates the moral convictions his religious faith requires. And he serves any customer any product that does not violate those religious convictions. Clearly the issue here is religious conviction, not discrimination - except for those that would like to control his religion and its expression.
And in this case that protection is being made to directly conflict with the free exercise clause of the 1st Amendment! You don't get to pick and chose which amendments you follow and which ones you can ignore.
You are using arguments to dismiss the harm to the baker caused by your position that were used by the guards in the Nazi interment camps to justify their actions.
To say Adultery is wrong is not bigotry. To say same-sex acts are wrong is not bigotry. To refuse to participate in a ceremony that justifies actions you believe are wrong are not bigotry.
What is bigotry is to despise another person simply because their religious faith causes them to have different moral standards from your own.
No answer for the argument I see ...
Jim
What I have said is not simply an opinion, it is a fact. The Bible (specifically the Christian Bible) does not command purity of the races as a generalized concept. There is nothing more to say here unless you are willing to provide justification for your assertion it does so beyond someone somewhere said they could do it.
The fact some people ABUSE a text cannot be used as a summary of the content of that same text. Otherwise, it would be fair to say Darwin supported Hitlers Eugenics. Or that YECs have good arguments for an Earth <10,000 years old.
As I said, people can make the bible say whatever they want, whether about anti-miscegenation laws or anti-homosexual laws.
You can't get out of the real conflict this way. Simply putting quotes around one instance of the word freedom and not around the other! Really? The freedom to the free exercise of religion is guaranteed by the constitution. The conflict that arises here is real and you need to step up to the plate and acknowledge it ... unless you prefer deceptive and disingenuous arguments and debates.
The only freedom being removed is the freedom of the baker to discriminate against a homosexual couple lawfully marrying each other.
It you say it a million times it will not make it correct. Taking your cues from Donald Trump?
While sexual-orientation might* be an inherited trait, sexual actions and practices are choices and subject to almost all religious moral codes. There is no discrimination against anyone's sexual orientation. However, what does exist here is the attempt to force a person to violate their religion's moral code as regards certain types of sexual action and thus restrict their right to follow and obey their religions teachings. Specifically, you want to force a man to design and create a symbol of a marriage which sanctions same-sex actions which according to a straight-forward reading of both Old and New testament texts are forbidden.
There seems to be no problem in bakers making cakes for divorced persons remarrying, which according to Jesus is adultery.
Not so. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 guarantees all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution and its duty to protect those rights under the Fifteenth Amendment.
You are using arguments to dismiss the harm to the baker caused by your position that were used by the guards in the Nazi interment camps to justify their actions.
Bigotry can never be justified even if done in the name of Jesus.
What is bigotry is to despise another person simply because their religious faith causes them to have different moral standards from your own.
No answer for the argument I see ...
Jim
Comment