Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gay Marriage as an attack on Christianity
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 136 of 1484 (802267)
03-14-2017 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by Rrhain
03-14-2017 8:42 AM


Re: related issues
Rrhain writes:
an awful lot of stuff which seems intended only to aggressively miss the point
I'm not going through that lot again - you must have got the point I was making or never will. It matters not.
Just for completeness, I'm saying that I believe that it's likely to be counter-productive to complain about bigots not baking cakes - to go actively looking for them to make examples. Pick more strategic targets, make a point of standing above the bigots not simply against them and impress reasoned and reasonable people with your cause and demeaner.
The cause has gone beyond the need to throw yourself under the King's horse - get smarter.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Rrhain, posted 03-14-2017 8:42 AM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:24 PM Tangle has replied
 Message 147 by Rrhain, posted 03-14-2017 3:06 PM Tangle has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 137 of 1484 (802276)
03-14-2017 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by Faith
03-14-2017 7:21 AM


Re: Summary of Topic
Faith writes:
So whenever there is a conflict between the law and a Christian's conscience about the ordinance of marriage the Christian must refuse to obey the law.
If something in your job offends your conscience, you get a different job.
If spewing carbon into the atmosphere offends your conscience, don't work in a gas station. If pornography offends your conscience, don't work in a sex shop. If your conscience is fussy about who should marry whom, don't work in the wedding industry.
Deliberately working in an industry where you KNOW you're going to have to break the law is NOT condoned by Christianity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Faith, posted 03-14-2017 7:21 AM Faith has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 138 of 1484 (802278)
03-14-2017 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Tangle
03-14-2017 9:38 AM


Re: related issues
I'm saying that I believe that it's likely to be counter-productive to complain about bigots not baking cakes - to go actively looking for them to make examples. Pick more strategic targets, make a point of standing above the bigots not simply against them and impress reasoned and reasonable people with your cause and demeaner.
To me, it's not about not baking the cake.
That would have been so easy to get away with if they had just said: "No thank you, I'm tired and don't feel like baking a cake right now."
But they didn't. Instead, they took a stand and said that they could not perform the service because the patrons were gay.
I can see why people would want to squash that.
If they would have quietly been bigots then we wouldn't be talking about this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Tangle, posted 03-14-2017 9:38 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by ringo, posted 03-14-2017 12:30 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 140 by Theodoric, posted 03-14-2017 12:32 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied
 Message 143 by Tangle, posted 03-14-2017 1:15 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 148 by Rrhain, posted 03-14-2017 3:28 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 139 of 1484 (802279)
03-14-2017 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by New Cat's Eye
03-14-2017 12:24 PM


Re: related issues
New Cat's Eye writes:
If they would have quietly been bigots then we wouldn't be talking about this.
"When bigotry is outlawed, only outlaws will be bigots."
Makes it easier to spot the outlaws.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:24 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:36 PM ringo has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 140 of 1484 (802281)
03-14-2017 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by New Cat's Eye
03-14-2017 12:24 PM


Re: related issues
But they need to suffer for their religion.
That is the whole point.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:24 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 141 of 1484 (802283)
03-14-2017 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by ringo
03-14-2017 12:30 PM


Re: related issues
"When bigotry is outlawed, only outlaws will be bigots."
Only if you start legislating thought...
Bigoted behavior may be outlawed, but you're not going to end bigotry, itself, with laws.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by ringo, posted 03-14-2017 12:30 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by ringo, posted 03-14-2017 12:47 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 149 by Rrhain, posted 03-14-2017 3:32 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 142 of 1484 (802285)
03-14-2017 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by New Cat's Eye
03-14-2017 12:36 PM


Re: related issues
New cat's Eye writes:
Bigoted behavior may be outlawed, but you're not going to end bigotry, itself, with laws.
The only part of bigotry that matters is the behavior.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:36 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 143 of 1484 (802286)
03-14-2017 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by New Cat's Eye
03-14-2017 12:24 PM


Re: related issues
NCE writes:
If they would have quietly been bigots then we wouldn't be talking about this.
Yeh, I'm making two points.
1. Baking bigots would be better off making an excuse and pointing to a nicer baker
2. LGBTs have won the major argument, so don't go around deliberately targeting baking bigots, it doesn't look good.
Now I apparently have to say also that any LGBT with a genuine grieveance and evidence of hurt needs to shout about it. But so much I thought was obvious.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:24 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by Rrhain, posted 03-14-2017 3:38 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


Message 144 of 1484 (802288)
03-14-2017 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Faith
03-14-2017 7:21 AM


Re: Summary of Topic
So whenever there is a conflict between the law and a Christian's conscience about the ordinance of marriage the Christian must refuse to obey the law. Since it is a law, that means the Christian will be punished in some way.
quote:
Colossians 3:22
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to curry their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.
A common quote used during the days of Jim Crow when Christians in the south were attempting to justify segregation and slavery by quoting the Bible.
Ah, those poor, persecuted Christians. Being 'forced' to 'obey' a law going against their 'conscience'. Must be rough.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Faith, posted 03-14-2017 7:21 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 145 of 1484 (802289)
03-14-2017 2:17 PM


No case at all
The whole basis for the claim that gay marriage is an attack on Christianity is based on the fact that a few Christian business openers have decided to defy State anti-discrimination laws and refuse to provide services to gay weddings.
In terms of both the scale and the limited connection to the Supreme Court decision this is absurd. That the business owners might be far better off seeing that their objections have a poor grounding in Christian doctrine - a fact brought out in this discussion - is not considered.
Indeed Faith herself puts any real concern for these people behind their use as a weapon against gay marriage - as seen by her refusal to even understand the laws under which they were convicted. And that is far from the worst of her behaviour.
But behaving badly does no better in making a case than ignoring the facts. Faced with intelligent, informed and rational opposition Faith was reduced to ranting and raving and finally running away.

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Rrhain, posted 03-14-2017 3:49 PM PaulK has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2578
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.8


(1)
Message 146 of 1484 (802291)
03-14-2017 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Faith
03-13-2017 10:12 PM


Re: religious exemption
Rrhain asks
Do you think you have a religious exemption to the law, Faith?
Faith admits
I think we SHOULD have an exemption, of course...
...Presumably only for her True Christians, and not for Catholics nor Muslims nor Buddhists nor any other religious sect. Because her True Christians are special.
But here in the United States of America (at least for a little while longer before this occupying Fascist Right Wing completes its current hijacking of our country) we have this quaint notion that no one is above the law.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Faith, posted 03-13-2017 10:12 PM Faith has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 147 of 1484 (802292)
03-14-2017 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Tangle
03-14-2017 9:38 AM


Re: related issues
Tangle runs away:
quote:
an awful lot of stuff which seems intended only to aggressively miss the point
Given your deliberate foolishness, one must be aggressive.
You'll never change unless you're confronted. Or is it "petty" to engage you?
quote:
I'm saying that I believe that it's likely to be counter-productive to complain about bigots not baking cakes - to go actively looking for them to make examples.
Right, because a black person being denied a hotel room is a legitimate cause for the law to come down hard on the hotelier.
But a gay couple being denied a wedding cake, that's just "petty." I mean, the black person has a legitimate gripe but for gays to think that they should have the law actually enforced for them is "counter-productive."
You don't get to decide what is important.
quote:
Pick more strategic targets, make a point of standing above the bigots not simply against them and impress reasoned and reasonable people with your cause and demeaner.
Whys thanks ya, massa! This here back o' the bus is just fine! It gets to the bus stop sames time as the front! I wouldn't want to run the risk of upsetting anybody who might be an ally by complaining!
quote:
The cause has gone beyond the need to throw yourself under the King's horse - get smarter.
And just what do you think the "cause" is? Third time I've asked you, Tangle:
What is it that was "won"?
You didn't think marriage equality was "the main battle," did you?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Tangle, posted 03-14-2017 9:38 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Tangle, posted 03-14-2017 3:56 PM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 148 of 1484 (802293)
03-14-2017 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by New Cat's Eye
03-14-2017 12:24 PM


Re: related issues
New Cat's Eye writes:
quote:
To me, it's not about not baking the cake.
And to the aggrieved customer, it isn't about baking the cake, either.
When you go to a restaurant and they serve you spoiled food, you don't eat it. You don't pay for it. You leave and go somewhere else.
And if it were just about the food, that's all you'd do. But since it isn't about the food, you then call the Health Department and report them for violations of safety regulations regarding food preparation and service.
But we've already established that you're OK with people being harmed in this situation because there shouldn't be any laws against serving spoiled food. Yelp will protect people.
quote:
That would have been so easy to get away with if they had just said: "No thank you, I'm tired and don't feel like baking a cake right now."
But they didn't. Instead, they took a stand and said that they could not perform the service because the patrons were gay.
I can see why people would want to squash that.
If they would have quietly been bigots then we wouldn't be talking about this.
Um, no. To go to your Yelp example, when enough people notice that the only time the proprietor is begging off is when the customers are gay, their still in violation of the law. And since they've now got a bunch of people who can claim a grievance, they're now facing a class action lawsuit.
If you want to be able to say, "I'm tired and don't feel like baking a cake right now," then all you need do is be a private contractor.
We've been through this before. Is there a reason why you've forgotten?
When you open your business as a public accommodation, you don't get to complain when the public shows up. You gain the benefit of having anybody as a customer. Yeah, you'll advertise, but it's to get people to know that you exist. You're not soliciting individual clients but are casting your net wide in the hopes of getting as many customers as possible. But the responsibility that comes along with that is the requirement that you take all customers. You don't get to say no. As a public accommodation, you must accommodate the public.
If you're not up to that, if you want to be able to pick and choose your clients (even if the criteria isn't all that particular), then you must establish yourself as a private contractor. Your advertisements are to find those specific people who would be a match for you. You get to say no. But the responsibility that comes along with that is that you have to go chasing your clients.
Suppose you want your picture taken. You could go to Glamour Shots at the mall. They're a public accommodation and as such, they cannot say no. And they cannot say, "I'm tired and don't feel like taking a picture right now." They might be able to get away with it for a while, but it will eventually come out and then they're just as screwed as if they just admitted it in the first place.
You could also try to get Anne Geddes to take your picture. However, she's not a public accommodation. She's a private contractor and as such, she can say no. And it can be for pretty much any reason.
But I forget...you think anti-discrimination laws are the problem. Yelp will save us all!
I guess that means you're for subsidizing people with tax money to help them pay for the internet, right? After all, what's the point of insisting that Yelp will solve the problem of bigotry if people can't access it?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:24 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by NoNukes, posted 03-14-2017 5:16 PM Rrhain has replied
 Message 175 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-15-2017 9:55 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 149 of 1484 (802294)
03-14-2017 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by New Cat's Eye
03-14-2017 12:36 PM


Re: related issues
New Cat's Eye responds to ringo:
quote:
quote:
"When bigotry is outlawed, only outlaws will be bigots."
Only if you start legislating thought...
And thank heaven nobody is suggesting that. You are free to be as bigoted as you wish. But if you're a public accommodation, you have to swallow that and provide the same excellent service to all your customers or face the consequences of your actions.
quote:
Bigoted behavior may be outlawed, but you're not going to end bigotry, itself, with laws.
No, for that, you need Yelp.
Or to be in the 1700s because they were in the fantasy land of "Capitalism" and didn't have to put up with those liberals thinking that behaviour should be regulated by the law. Racism only happened once capitalism was rejected, right? It was them liberals and socialists and communists that came up with the segregation laws! No True Capitalist ever denies a customer, right?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-14-2017 12:36 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


(1)
Message 150 of 1484 (802295)
03-14-2017 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by Tangle
03-14-2017 1:15 PM


Re: related issues
Tangle writes:
quote:
1. Baking bigots would be better off making an excuse and pointing to a nicer baker
No, that's still illegal. When it comes out that you only do that to the gay customers, you're now facing a class-action lawsuit.
Public accommodations are required to accommodate the public. They don't get to say no.
quote:
2. LGBTs have won the major argument, so don't go around deliberately targeting baking bigots, it doesn't look good.
Whys thanks ya, massa! This here back o' the bus is just fine! It gets to the bus stop sames time as the front! I wouldn't want to run the risk of upsetting anybody who might be an ally by complaining!
quote:
Now I apparently have to say also that any LGBT with a genuine grieveance and evidence of hurt needs to shout about it. But so much I thought was obvious.
Because a black person being denied a hotel room is a "genuine grievance" with "evidence of hurt."
But a gay couple being denied a cake is "trivial" and it would be "petty" and "counterproductive" to do anything about it.
After all, the bigoted hotelier can simply "make an excuse and point to a nicer hotel." No harm, no foul, right?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by Tangle, posted 03-14-2017 1:15 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024