Christian Mingle Ordered To Accept Gay Singles .....

Your actions are tamer because your religious views are not allowed to reign in this country.
Given your prior comments I don't know if your beliefs vary much.

If you mean murderers; first if you justify the death penalty by biblical law I would ask for valid evidence that the bible is accurate. Since you cannot provide such evidance, which you cannot, your belief is invalid. Second, the argument behind the justification of the death penalty is complex and would entirely derail this thread - that said, I can justify the use of the death penalty in extreme cases of violence - unlike your view that people should be killed because they do not bow down to your religious preference.

You people are a plague upon this Earth

 

Yes, it's terrible that we have to carve out special protections for certain historically oppressed groups. That does suck because it shows how shallow we still are. But these public accommodation anti-discrimination laws have been upheld time and time again as being constitutional and until we all can learn how to play nice with people who are different than us, then we'll continue to have these laws.

 

I believe that it isn't up to you if I should have to be saved and repent for any fornication or adultery I may have committed in my past, since I don't subscribe to the point of view that either of those things are necessarily bad. I also don't consider someone being gay to be equivalent to a commission of a crime like bestiality, pedophilia or incest. But nice try at a false equivalency...

 

Public accommodation laws have existed since 1964/

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark piece of civil rights legislation in the United States that outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It ended unequal application of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by facilities that served the general public (known as "public accommodations").

 

It takes a very imaginative mind to say that -

Thou shalt not be meddled, [(or) mingled,] with a man, by lechery of a woman, for it is abomination.

says the same as

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

The idea that Lev 18:22 has anything to do with homosexual relationships did not become mainstream in Christian doctrine until the Middle ages, there are currently around 12 hypotheses concerning Lev 18:22 none of which have a consensus.

 

64 act doesn't include sexual orientation, so not sure of the relevance of your history lesson

 

a Federal commission ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act Covers Sexual Orientation Discrimination, and even though that ruling was not binding on federal courts, it was persuasive, further Supreme Court decisions have cemented this ruling into law - Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989) & Oncale v. Sundowner, 523 U.S. 75 (199

 

That's in reference to Title VII employment law, NOT public accommodation law. AND had nothing to do with sexual orientation.

AND

No results found for "a Federal commission ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act Covers Sexual Orientation Discrimination".
https://www.google.com/search?as_q=..._occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=

Probably from some obscure LGBT publication google doesn't pick up

 

And there where you'll be wrong. I can indeed prove the Bible to be accurate but that's not the subject of the thread.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not up to me its up to God. And why is it false equivalency to compare bestiality and homosexuality? There are several states that allow bestiality.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually its not all that far fetched.

Lechery

NOUN
excessive or offensive sexual desire; lustfulness.

 

Then do it, prove God exists and the bible is his sole and exhaustive word.

Homosexuality is a consentual act. Beastiality is not. Frightening that you cannot understand the word consent.

 

I read the bible. Particularly these verses...

Deuteronomy 17:12
Exodus 22:17
Leviticus 20:13
Leviticus 20:27
Exodus 21:15
Proverbs 20:20
Leviticus 20:10
Leviticus 21:9
Exodus 22:19
2 Chronicles 15:12-13
Zechariah 13:3
Deuteronomy 22:20-21
Exodus 31:12-15

It clearly calls for genocide. Is it God's word?

If so your god is evil.

What?

I don't think genocide is better.

No it isn't.

You have 13.

 

You obviously didn't look very hard (or even at all) - https://www.google.co.uk/search?num....2.2.0....0...1c.1.64.hp..0.0.0.0.nty5mfCWZ9k

 

So even with your assertion, ie replacing lechery with the definition you have provided, gives us -

Thou shalt not be meddled, [(or) mingled,] with a man, by [excessive or offensive sexual desire; lustfulness] of a woman, for it is abomination.

Still a long way from Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

 

Your point? I was searching on your quote. And your first search result confirms my statement and refutes your assertion.

 

My point being that you didn't even bother to look

Really, you obviously didn't read it then

The ruling states that “sexual orientation is inherently a ‘sex-based consideration.’” In 2012, the EEOC ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects transgender individuals from discrimination.

 

Not the sharpest crayon in the box. My statement you are confirming.

Title 7 is employment discrimination law. Title 2 is public accommodation law. And it is the case cited in your quote, Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, that didn't have anything to do with sexual orientation.

AND

About 64,400 results (0.47 seconds) For "fired for being gay"
https://www.google.com/search?as_q=..._occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=

Shows that what you speak of was something some recent EEOC decisiont created on their own. Contrary to every other court or commission who ever addressed the topic.

 

It's not the thread to do it as I just said.

Under certain states' law bestiality is just as consensual. If I'm not mistaken consent means that the two involving parties must be mature and have full knowledge of the event they are about to partake. Fido certainly have maturity in the biological sense of the word and more than likely he he has full knowledge of the event. We've legally allowed far more harmful things done to animals like hunting and fishing.

 

Of all of those verses only one of them called for the seat of someone who isn't a believer and it wasn't even a command from God. It was man's commandment.

Which I never denied. In fact I gave the reason why it calls for genocide and its because they were hybrids of fallen angels and humans.

Yes. The real question is who are you to cherry pick what's God's word or isn't? If you're a Christian (which at this point I'm doubting that) then what do you consider God's word and instruction?

Nope.

You said the verse changed in the 19th century. Show me the original 1611 version for comparison.

I don't either. What are you talking about?

Yes it is. Only a few of the verses you listed calls for "genocide".

Only one mentioned what you're talking about.

 

Look at what the definition of "by" meant at that time.

 

But they all call for killing.

You can't justify genocide.

Somebody with superior morality to the bible.

God's word, not the bible.

Yes

That wouldn't be the original.

The bible.

So you admit you are pro genocide and believe god is?

Prove it

 

I'm sure no one will mind, and next to your belief that homosexuals should be executed (after a trial of course), it will at least be entertaining.

Your cop out is noted though

An animal cannot consent, because 5 states do not criminalize zoophilia does not negate this fact.

 

Which are justified.

I just did. They weren't fully human. They were part demon.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Which is what exactly?

Nope.

Irrelavant. You said things changed in the 19th century. So show me what it said in the 1611 version.

The Bible didnt say genocide was better either.

No. They weren't fully human so technically it wasn't a genocide.

I did. Only one of them mentions you should kill someone if they have a different faith and that's in Chronicles.

 

It wasn't a cop out. Like I said I didn't want to derail the thread (any more than I already did). But since you asked one of the most obvious evidences of design is the complexity of our bodies and the universe. Even scientists more or less admit as much by seriously speculating that we are but a computer program. The obvious question is who's the programmer?

Yet those five states seem to think that its ok to allow it. Why?

 

You can't justify genocide with a book. That's what isis does.

That doesn't justify it any more than saying they're part leprechaun.

The worst people today have better morality than the bible.

I don't know. I'm not arrogant enough to believe my opinions are God's word. I also am not stupid enough to believe homicidal cavemen's scribblings are the word of God.

I don't have a time machine.

I posted 13 verses that indicate your statement is twaddle.

Demons don't exist as an entity that can mate with humans. You might as well say they are part leprechaun or klingon.

sorry, all i saw was the claims of a brain washed cult member. I ment hard evidence not folklore.

 

Which in no way, shape or form proves the bible is correct or the word of the creator. I will give you that there is - more likely than not - a creator or creators, but saying that we should execute an entire group of people because of a book that man wrote, published, rewrote and published again is absurd - Isis level beliefs.

I would assume they do so because animals are viewed as positions which is not similar to a homosexual Union. Many of these states, not surprisingly, have very lax animal protection laws.