Jump to content

No Gays Allowed?


bullets13

Recommended Posts

LOL and don't forget, no Stars & Bars. I think if I fit in that category I would take my business elsewhere and hurt them on the profit margin but I wouldn't whine and cry about like I feel some will do because their feelings got hurt!

Edited by 77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

​Can't a privately owned business post, "we have the right to refuse service"?

​Post it? Sure. 

Enforce it? Maybe.... according who is banned and if it violates the federal civil rights acts such as race, national origin, sex (but not sexual preference.... yet), religion, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

​Post it? Sure. 

Enforce it? Maybe.... according who is banned and if it violates the federal civil rights acts such as race, national origin, sex (but not sexual preference.... yet), religion, etc. 

Didn't a small privately owned bakery recently get in "trouble" when they refused to cater a gay wedding because the owners young son worked and she didn't want him around it?   I'm senile so can't remember how it turned out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they should be able to refuse service to homosexuals.

What if they had a business with a conservative crowd that might be uncomfortable around homosexuals...should they be forced to sit by and lose business.

You could replace them with rowdy bikers that made folks uncomfortable and not come back... Can they be refused?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

​Post it? Sure. 

Enforce it? Maybe.... according who is banned and if it violates the federal civil rights acts such as race, national origin, sex (but not sexual preference.... yet), religion, etc. 

This could very well be the instance that brings it in front of the the SC for review, depending on how long it stays in the news and whether or not it brings about a lawsuit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since he's a baptist preacher who doesn't want gays in his store because "what they're doing is wrong", shouldn't he also be banning   divorcees, fornicators, liars, blasphemers, idolators, and all other manner of sinners from his store?

Should be his call to ban whoever he wants for whatever behavior he wants.

Some businesses may make the call simply because they feel it might cost them business. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be his call to ban whoever he wants for whatever behavior he wants.

Some businesses may make the call simply because they feel it might cost them business. 

The occasional gay customer is going to cost him business?  Gay customers go to EVERY business.  That being said, I'm not arguing whether he has a right to do so.  I'm asking other Christians that, as a minister, is he demonstrating Christianity by singling out an individual sin to ban from his store while continuing to cater to sinners of all other kinds.  Whether or not you believe in gay marriage, I can't find anything in the bible that preaches picking one sin and denying that sinner the opportunities that you'd afford to different types of sinners. 

Edited by bullets13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The occasional gay customer is going to cost him business?  Gay customers go to EVERY business.  That being said, I'm not arguing whether he has a right to do so.  I'm asking other Christians that, as a minister, is he demonstrating Christianity by singling out an individual sin to ban from his store while continuing to cater to sinners of all other kinds.  Whether or not you believe in gay marriage, I can't find anything in the bible that preaches picking one sin and denying that sinner the opportunities that you'd afford to different types of sinners. 

If he was going to keep out all sinners, no one could come in.

Would you make any distinction between a child molester and someone that speeds...both are sinners.

He can make his choice and folks can decide whether or not to go there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he was going to keep out all sinners, no one could come in.

Would you make any distinction between a child molester and someone that speeds...both are sinners.

He can make his choice and folks can decide whether or not to go there.

I would make that distinction.  Not sure I'd make one between gays and people having sex out of wedlock, though.  It's also worth noting that he didn't ban child molesters ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would make that distinction.  Not sure I'd make one between gays and people having sex out of wedlock, though.  It's also worth noting that he didn't ban child molesters ;) 


Businesses should be able to make the call, and reap the rewards or suffer the consequences IMO.

Taking a stand can help, like Chic-fil-a, or it could hurt, like the Dixie Chicks, but should be allowed without gov interference...let the market decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since he's a baptist preacher who doesn't want gays in his store because "what they're doing is wrong", shouldn't he also be banning   divorcees, fornicators, liars, blasphemers, idolators, and all other manner of sinners from his store?

​He isn't banning customers. He is not wanting to make a cake for the sin.

Yes your comment might hold some water if he was asked to make a Fornicator's Cake, a Liar's Cake, etc.

It is making the cake to celebrate the sin that he is against, not the sinner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a matter of fact if you are talking about the Colorado case, the baker offered to make any other item than a cake. Again, it is not the customer or the sin itself but being forced to back it up with a celebration cake for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The occasional gay customer is going to cost him business?  Gay customers go to EVERY business.  That being said, I'm not arguing whether he has a right to do so.  I'm asking other Christians that, as a minister, is he demonstrating Christianity by singling out an individual sin to ban from his store while continuing to cater to sinners of all other kinds.  Whether or not you believe in gay marriage, I can't find anything in the bible that preaches picking one sin and denying that sinner the opportunities that you'd afford to different types of sinners. 

Yes , I agree

Edited by Big girl
additional info
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a matter of fact if you are talking about the Colorado case, the baker offered to make any other item than a cake. Again, it is not the customer or the sin itself but being forced to back it up with a celebration cake for it. 

Actually, this thread is about a hardware store owner who has posted a sign that no gays are allowed in his store.  I can actually understand where the cake shop owner is coming from, even if I don't necessarily agree with him.  The same goes for churches.  A church should not have to wed them if they don't want to.  This case is a little different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem I have with it, how will he tell/know someone is gay. Will they look different? Will you be asked before you enter? Is it a just a judgment call by the owner depending on how you look? Maybe it's just two men walking side by side? I wonder if he has the same sign on the front of his church?

He may or may not have the right but there's a lot wrong with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,978
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    newyourk01
    Newest Member
    newyourk01
    Joined



  • Posts

    • Heading into the summer and before two a days get going… what are some concerns or positives about your team heading into next season? I’d like to hear from some H-F people because according to some they are the district favorites heading into the season. I’m just trying to pass some time at least until we get our DCTF magazines lol For Bellville my concern is filling some holes on defense… specifically at LB,S, and DT… bright spots ? Basically the entire offensive line returns that paved the way for 3 RBs to rush for more than 1600 yards a  on the season (2 of those RBs will return as well). With all that said Bellville should still be a region favorite this upcoming season.
    • That’s not a choice, it’s the same thing and equally dangerous.    I’ve literally heard (with my own listening ears) the R County Chairman boast in a speech that “the only time I’ve ever voted for a Democrat was when I voted for Hillary in the Democrat primary! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!” You’ll never guess who is tweeting all over the place about how we need closed primaries this week.  Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.  Escalation of force.  These are concepts that you completely understand and teach.  Whatever we do today, we’ll pay for tomorrow. Impeach a President over something stupid? They’ll impeach yours twice.  Promise to lock up your political rival if you get elected? You can’t cry over somebody else doing it to you… even if you were just blowing a little smoke for the morons.   The old days of “don’t throw rocks if you live in glass houses” has now become “I’m pretty sure I’ve got more rocks than they do.” The frightening thing is that Ds only do it to Rs. Rs do it to Ds and other Rs alike without hesitation.  
    • Definitely does NOT sound like a fit for PN-G.
    • No offense, but both sides do it.  The Rs in Texas want to do away with decades of precedent and demand that Dems are no longer given chair positions on any committees in the Tx House. It sounds reasonable enough, until you arrive at a point when the Ds enjoy a single seat majority in the house, select the most leftist speaker of all times, and the refuse to give Rs any say in the legislative process by refusing to give them any committee chairs.     Experience has shown me that any time a party seeks to consolidate power in a legislative body, it backfires.    What I don’t like is a world where we cheer for Manchin for doing his own thing, but also re-elect guys like Paxton and Patrick when they make threats to R Legislators if they don’t do exactly what the Radical Right demands. Our Rep here in Hardin County lost his spot for voting against private school vouchers-his wife is a teacher. He also voted his conscience on the Paxton impeachment.  It cost him his seat…. Not because of the will of the voters in his district, but because if millions of outside dollars pumped into the race from outside the district and even an endorsement of his unknown challenger by Donald Trump himself.    Why do people like you applaud Manchin for being his own man and then vote against Phelan for doing the same thing?
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...