N.Y. farm will no longer host weddings rather than allow same-sex ceremonies

Typically you can't address the points or your own comments and so try to draw me into some sort of flame war by a childish attempt to bait.

What is really ironic and hypocritical is you claim to live in a state of liberty and yet want to deny that liberty to others simply because they don't adhere to your moral opinion. perhaps you should be reminded what liberty means;

Liberty - the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's behaviour or political views.

Seems you only want that to apply to you, if you can't have that then you would prefer mob rule. ANYTHING so long as it imposes your morality onto others.

Another really funny thing is you use a word - serfdom - that you obviously don't have a clue to it's meaning - serfdom: Serfdom is the status of peasants under feudalism - feudalism ceased to exist in the UK around 1660 with the introduction of the Tenures Abolition Act 1660 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenures_Abolition_Act_1660

but of course you won't allow the facts to get in the way of your hyperbole.

 

why aren't you getting it? I don't care one wit about your Liberties or Freedoms. You don't live here and you've got no horse in this race

 

what are you not getting is that you don't live in a closed country and what happens there has effects through out the world, add to that-that your argument is one from ignorance and a standard cop-out from those who have nothing to support their point of view.

furthermore I really couldn't care less about your attempts at deflection, I will continue to point out your inane position.

Also if you "don't care one wit about your Liberties or Freedoms." why are you attempting to distract by bringing them into the argument.

 

If they were militant you wouldn't be breathing.

 

this is what I mean by Liberty...now you 're claiming that I should be dead? Just for having my opinion? There are those in this thread that have hinted as much.
And I have not one once of fear about that. they are cowards, run in packs, and claim to practice the same (*)(*)(*)(*) as animals.....yep, militant.
"We'll burn down Chic Fillet."
"We'll destroy Hobby Lobby."
yep. very militant............and now. an off-handed threat that I would be dead....you only keep proving my point.

 

You are actually proving my point. No chick fil as were burned, you are alive and hobby lobby seems to be non-destroyed. Seems there aren't any militant gays.

I didn't threaten you. I stated a fact. If you want to see militants, go toIraq and find these people that call themselves ISIS, then tell them you are an American. You will learn what militant means.

Frankly it's just hyperbole on your part. Call people that disagree with you militant because you can't put together any argument.

But I guess those people over in Iraq that got their heads chopped off don't have it as bad as you. You have to share your world with gays, oh you poor soul.

 

it was YOUR statement about my death............so, that was a threat.....and it was yours

 

The law and constitution doesnt obligate people to sue, nor does it encourage or discourage them to sue-it simply gives them the right to sue if they choose to do so for whatever reason.

The bible doesnt say not to have associate with sinners. Jesus even associated himself with sinners like prostitutes, etc. But he didnt participate in their sin. Baking a cake for their wedding is participating in their celebration of sin.

 

So if Jesus gave a prostitute a piece of bread, does that mean he was "participating in her sin"?

 

So, our Bill of Rights affect the world? just how is that? I seriously doubt that you can make such a connection even if you deal with this issue with emotion...you still have no horse in this race
And just who are you to dictate our Rights to us? God?

 

correct, so then you should have no reason to try and discredit the people who sued the baker.

For about the 20th time what your or anybody else's religion tells them is a sin or not does not over rule the legal right of people not to be discriminated against, what you or others find morally wrong has absolutely no bearing on the rights of others.

It is a very simple thing .. if you offer a services to the people you cannot refuse that service to another set of people based purely on what you perceive to be morally right or wrong. You may not agree with that, but in the end your personal opinion means very little on the subject.

 

Considering the fact that I never stated your BoR affects the world, you are yet again attempting to distract from you own failings. you really should learn to read and comprehend what people write instead of trying to place your own assumptions onto them, I said

what happens there has effects through out the world

not a single mention of your BoR's.

Funniest thing of all is the only one dealing in emotions here is you, I am dealing in facts .. you know those things you ignore.

There is only one person here trying to dictate rights and that is you .. your only allegiance to your countries constitution and BoR's is when it suits your own agenda.

 

It was your statement about imaginary militant gay people.

I was simply explaining if they were militant you wouldn't be breathing. That isn't a threat, at least not to people who have sense.

 

really.........then you claim that I should be dead if there are militant gays, eh? That's real nice of you...........

 

The gay couple should have just gone to a different bakery. Then it would have been a win win situation for both sides. The baker doesnt violate his religious beliefs, and the couple gets the cake they want. They were under NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO SUE.

 

Why because you say so just so you can defend the vial actions of a bigot.

So according to you having your rights trampled on is a "win win situation"

The bakers religious beliefs have no bearing on the issue .. a religious belief does not give a person the right to discriminate against other people.

Neither were they under no legal obligation NOT to sue, the fact of the matter is the law was on their side and by you defending the actions of the baker you are defending people who break the law .. how noble of you.

 

I totally support what Jack Phillips did-no apologies.

Getting a cake from a different bakery still gives you what u want.

Give me one example (other than gay marriage) of a person being required to provide a service to the public that violates their religious beliefs. If not, all you are arguing for is giving gays special treatment. Jack Phillips generally had no problem selling goods to gay customers-he just didnt want to participate in their wedding ceremony, which is a totally morally valid choice.

Imagine if that baker lived in Russia. He wouldnt have been sued. Russia isnt as bad as some people say. At least Christian bakers arent sued over there.

 

good to know you support bigots

and allows a bigot to break the law, by your logic it's ok to ignore anyone who happens to be religious breaking the law . .you should be an advocate for paedophile priests.

I don't have to the baker broke the law. End Of Story, and for the goodness knows how many times, your or anybodies else's moral opinion has no bearing what-so-ever. you can bleat like a stuck record as much as you like it does not change the reality of the issue . .but as reality seems to be something you deny I doubt you will ever understand.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

 

Which has absolutley nothing to do with the topic. Appeal to emotion, comparing 2 totally different things.

Why do you support special treatment for gays? Name one other situation where somebody has to provide a public service to accomodate a sinful celebration.

Yes it does. Russia doesnt allow gay marriage or anytyhing like that.

 

Your logic, live with it.

I don't support special treatment for anyone, where as it is plain to see you want special treatment for bigots.

As Russian does not have a constitution bearing any resemblance to the USA and Russia is basically a Communist country, it certainly does not have anything to do with the topic .. but it is good to know you want a Russian type government ruling the USA.

Now Sam you are boring me, nothing you say has any merit, credence or relevance .. so .. time for you to be ignored again.

 

If you believe the gay couple in Colorado wasnt getting special treatment, then give me ONE EXAMPLE of a religious buisness-person being required for the sake of not discriminating, to provide a service that goes against their religions moral code, other than baking a cake for a gay couple.

 

Jack Phillips was not a bigot. He had no problem selling baked goods to gay customers. If he said, "im not selling a cake to gays", then I would agree with you that he should be sued, but he had valid moral reasons for what he did-he didnt want to create a cake that was used for a celebration of sin. The Bible says not to partake in others sins.

Discrimination is wrong, but what Jack Phillips did wasnt wrong, because it was an exception to the rule. Baking a cake for a gay wedding is a moral agreement to use your skills to participate in a celebration of sin. Of course, you dont understand this, because your viewpoint is too black and white.

 

I don't give a flying (*)(*)(*)(*) what you are any other bigot consider a "moral agreement", it has not and never will have any bearing on pissing on the rights of others.

The sooner you start facing reality and not slobbering over your wet dreams the better educated and less of a troll you will be.

 

FFS I have no need to answer your self serving stupidity, this case is no different to any other case where a business has refused to serve someone based on that persons beliefs .. now please go and troll someone else.

 

Why are you accusing me of being a troll? I am speaking my honest opinions.