Cook says discriminatory 'religious freedom' laws are dangerous, calls for action

1141517192025

Comments

  • Reply 321 of 492
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Back then young women married off for survival reasons, and that still happens in many countries today. Many old beliefs are still upheld, but any real Christian is taught to love their neighbor which pretty much means everyone, and would not discriminate gays unless they're being asked to produce a good, or provide a service that's contrary to their beliefs.

    If baking a cake for someone who disagrees with you violates your religious beliefs, I would suggest going into another line of business. By that logic no upstanding Christian could bake a cake for a Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu person.

    Didn't jesus wash the feet of the homeless and prostitutes? I'm pretty sure he would have baked them a cake :/
  • Reply 322 of 492
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,924member
    msantti wrote: »
    Why are Christians being singled out in regards to religious beliefs by the way?

    Because you'll be called a bigot if you target Jewish and Islamic people.
  • Reply 323 of 492
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,513member
    ned bulous wrote: »
    If baking a cake for someone who disagrees with you violates your religious beliefs, I would suggest going into another line of business. By that logic no upstanding Christian could bake a cake for a Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu person.

    Didn't jesus wash the feet of the homeless and prostitutes? I'm pretty sure he would have baked them a cake :/
    This isn't a Chistian-specific issue. In fact many Christian churches openly approve same-sex couples.

    700
  • Reply 324 of 492
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    jungmark wrote: »
    msantti wrote: »
    Why are Christians being singled out in regards to religious beliefs by the way?

    Because you'll be called a bigot if you target Jewish and Islamic people.

    Or more specifically, in this case, because Christian Conservatives were the architects of this law.
  • Reply 325 of 492
    mstone wrote: »
    websnap wrote: »
     


    With all due respect, that’s silly. They don’t care why you think they are lesser than (here is a tip, I guarantee they have heard it numerous times), nor should they. Your reasons are your own and that is about you. They cannot/will not/should not be expected to both understand and not be offended by your own personal choice when you have, by all accounts, set up shop to cater to a certain service or industry. So you want to tell them “honestly” why they are such heathens that you won’t take their money? That is even MORE insulting. Your answer is to take the time to tell them how their personal lives are so disgusting to you that you not only won’t take their money, you wouldn’t politely lie to them? As a minority – let me tell you – The polite lie is much better from a stranger than the honest truth. The polite lie – even if it is obvious – at least tells the person they didn’t want to hurt your feelings. The honest truth from a stranger is a sermon no one asked for and is just about always insulting and condescending.

    Then again, if you were to turn away service from a person just looking to give you money – you don’t care much about people’s feelings anyway.


    Obviously you are too emotional about this. You don't call them disgusting heathens for starters. So you want to be lied to, ok...whatever. If the baker said something like please let me find you another baker because my religious convictions are in conflict with same sex marriage which makes me uncomfortable with this job. If it is done politely the gays should not be offended.

    Just to be clear I won't refuse to work for them because I'm not a religious crack pot.

    You start by saying that he's too emotional, then finish by scornfully saying that you're not a 'religious crack pot'.

    Seems to me you're plenty emotional.
  • Reply 326 of 492
    msanttimsantti Posts: 1,377member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by muppetry View Post





    Or more specifically, in this case, because Christian Conservatives were the architects of this law.

    Okay, Muslim beliefs get a pass.

     

    Just getting the facts straight here.

  • Reply 327 of 492
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    ned bulous wrote: »
    If baking a cake for someone who disagrees with you violates your religious beliefs, I would suggest going into another line of business. By that logic no upstanding Christian could bake a cake for a Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu person.

    Didn't jesus wash the feet of the homeless and prostitutes? I'm pretty sure he would have baked them a cake :/

    The baking of a cake for a gay person shouldn't be a problem unless you're asked for it to depict homosexual activity.
  • Reply 328 of 492
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,724member
    This is the basis of all three Judeo-based religions.

    But I agree with you.

    Personally, I think anyone who actually believes in religion, especially Judiasm, Christianiry, or Islam, is an idiot or using it for power/control purposes.

    Amen. ????
  • Reply 329 of 492
    msanttimsantti Posts: 1,377member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    No, he's on the right side.  And he's on the same side as the NFL, the NCAA, the NBA, Angie's List (and she's a total right-wing nut-job!), Salesforce, PayPal, Google, and even Bret freakin' Bair from FOX NEWS!

     

    You -- and your compatriots here -- seem to be almost the ONLY people on the planet who think he's on the wrong side.

     

    Let me ask you:  When AZ passed a similar law, and the NFL said that they would cancel the Phoenix Super Bowl, and move it somewhere else if it were signed into law, did you feel exactly the same way?  Because you know Gov. Brewer vetoed that law, a law which she had pushed for until the rubber met the road with the NFL.  So, did you think that, "The NFL should just stick to playing football and stay out of politics and social issues?"


    The NCAA Final 4 is playing their games in Indiana.

     

    Think the games will be cancelled?

     

    Probably not.

  • Reply 330 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Splif View Post

     

    Hmmmm...I wonder what kind of posts I would find on conservative sites. Should I base my opinion on what a few people entered on a website forum? You seem to be a fairly intelligent person most of the time and I'm pretty sure that you can distinguish between what is noise and what is not. Yet, you always seem to shank it into the weeds.




    AaronJ said that "Liberals do not hate the rich". The reply was to that comment. If he had said anything about "conservatives" the reply would have been different. Is that easy to understand?

  • Reply 331 of 492
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    ned bulous wrote: »
    If baking a cake for someone who disagrees with you violates your religious beliefs, I would suggest going into another line of business. By that logic no upstanding Christian could bake a cake for a Jewish, Islamic, or Hindu person.

    Didn't jesus wash the feet of the homeless and prostitutes? I'm pretty sure he would have baked them a cake :/

    The baking of a cake for a gay person shouldn't be a problem unless you're asked for it to depict homosexual activity.

    Or condone it, which a wedding cake would do.
  • Reply 332 of 492
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,724member
    Do you know why this is? Because they have to deal with them and their crap every single day!

    I suppose minorities could say exactly the same thing regarding cops.
  • Reply 333 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post





    Please share some of those links. Otherwise STFU.

     

    Do your own homework, freeloader.

  • Reply 334 of 492
    bsenkabsenka Posts: 799member
    aaronj wrote: »

    Honest question: Sarcasm?

    Absolutely not. The opponents of this law are bigots. The vitriol against it is proof that it's needed.
  • Reply 335 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post





    I suppose minorities could say exactly the same thing regarding cops.

     

    What about minority cops?

  • Reply 336 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post





    Absolutely not. The opponents of this law are bigots. The vitriol against it is proof that it's needed.



    That's an unprovable negative assertion.

  • Reply 337 of 492
    bsenkabsenka Posts: 799member

    That's an unprovable negative assertion.

    This thread is proof enough.
  • Reply 338 of 492
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post





    This thread is proof enough.



    No it isn't.

  • Reply 339 of 492
    They shouldn't be. Any religious belief system that teaches that those who don't share your particular ideology are fair game for discriminatory treatment should be called out.

    This is the basis of all three Judeo-based religions.

    But I agree with you.

    Personally, I think anyone who actually believes in religion, especially Judiasm, Christianiry, or Islam, is an idiot or using it for power/control purposes.

    You're quite right.

    We're all fools, even Satanists and atheists, but especially we Christians.

    C'est last vie.
  • Reply 340 of 492
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nowayout11 View Post

     



    How many Islamic politicians are there in America trying to pander to an Islamic base for political gain? Derp.




    There is exactly one Muslim in Congress, out of 535 people.  And I've never heard him pander to anyone.

     

    Just answering your rhetorical question. :)

Sign In or Register to comment.