Replies

I agree with you up to the point that in at least a couple of cases—with one that went all the way to the Supreme court of New Mexico—that a business was OBLIGATED and REQUIRED by law to not only conduct business with gays (which should not be objected to, as in the case of the civil rights and blacks at the lunch counters in the 60s), but to PROMOTE the homosexual lifestyle with their labor.

You should have the right, as a business, to not be forced to promote things that are considered by yourself to be sinful and vile, and would jeopardize your soul with your God. I think it is not discrimination. I believe that even the sharpest mind in the legal profession notes that homosexuality has always been a sin in Christianity, along with fornication, murder, lying, cheating at cards, getting wastedly drunk, watching pornography, beating up people, stealing, being cruel to animals beyond reason, and a host of other things, some illegal, some not. But it is not like the idea that Christians would be against promoting any of that would be a new thing.

We have a right to keep our traditions and religious beliefs as long as it doesn’t hurt others. It does not hurt a homosexual wanting to get married to have to shop around a little to find a baker or photographer who will work for them. That is really my argument. It doesn’t HURT them. The law cannot force equality based on what is considered bad BEHAVIOR by some and not by others. In this case, the law can only stay out of the way and let people work it out themselves.

The idea that the law could FORCE someone in this case really is ludicrous. They want to argue it hurts them, but then by extrapolation, having a religion say your sexual habits are sinful hurts them also, and when the law says that religion MUST remove such a tenant because it is discriminatory, makes us all slaves to the law without religious freedom at all.

Arizona may or may not need such a law as they tried, but the wheels of justice have already turned on our religious freedom. That HAS occurred. The Arizona law was a reaction, and not a bolt out of the blue.

I agree with everything you said. It’s outrageous that we are experiencing the tyranny of a minority.

In other words if you own a tattoo parlor and a homo comes in and say I want you to write BJ's are cool on both arms you don't have to do it? What about the Mexicon who comes in and wants Reconquista gringo written on his chest? Do you have to do that one? Justa a little clarification here....