Gay Marriage as an attack on Christianity

That seems unlikely. People change their perspective on the message of the Bible all the time. Some may never change, but it remains possible for it to happen. And you don't get to tell others either. That's rather my point. The Bible is not going to change. What people think of it and how they interpret it changes over time. That's just an observable fact. Yes, I'm perfectly aware of this. The Bible, for the record doesn't say 'thou shalt not provide services for gay marriages' either. Ruin? Even if Sweet Cakes was 'ruined' what other bakery has been ruined, who is the second one you are thinking of? Well if we're going to be dicks about this, I can play that game. Yes you selfish Christians who invented your ideas out of thin air doesn't get to have its way over the freedoms of people who actually exist.Does this kind of attitude actually help us? Or does it just create more heat than light? Yeah, but unfortunately people, typically those calling themselves Bible believing Christians, refused to provide them.The Biblical definition has not been changed. Has it? I thought your entire point is that it was not going to change. So it cannot be destroyed. It is what it is. And yet, time and time again - this was in practice not regarded as sufficient. I guess you haven't watched the struggle over the years, but the gay community has sought all manner of accommodations, but they were never treated as having the same rights as a married couple. It shouldn't have been rocket science, and you had decades to fight alongside them for their rights. But Biblical Christians were worse than silent, they were among the champions of denying these things. But Bible Believing Conservative Christians can still have marriage the way they believe in. It's just that atheist Jewish gays can have the marriage the way they believe in now. This seems to aggravate you, like you aren't afforded special privileges or something. No - that's the point. You say it's the law allowing same-sex marriage that is the problem. But when I point out that this isn't what resulted in the legal actions you resort to the fact that its merely the fact that gay people called it a marriage that matters.You are dictating what gay people call their relationship.
We are not dictating what you call yours.Regardless of whether the definition of marriage is changed in law, you will treat us poorly even if we have the audacity to call our relationships a marriage. That's why I know this isn't about government actions persecuting Christians. It's about Christians wanting the power to dictate what words mean to other people and what words they should use to describe their relationship. It's about you being upset that you are losing control of this power. Animus. That's what it is. Animus and fear and anger at losing your special status.If you think it sucks to be treated equally - you are really going to hate being treated as less than equal. Civil rights for Jews might force someone to give up theirs, however. Or are your rights the only ones that matter?

I read through the decision, and I agree. Masterpiece Cakeshop acted with a sense of decorum and were as polite as respectful as could be given the situation (ie., one could argue their actions were intrinsically impolite, but given this they did it in a polite fashion). Compare and contrast with Sweet Cakes by Melissa's method for approaching the issue.I think it was probably right that they lost their original case, but I agree the perception of an unfair hearing based on the comments made by the Commissioners would leave a burning sense that an injustice was done and this should be rectified.I am curious now as to what will happen for them? IIRC they received basically a slap on the wrist, the requirement for training their staff and reports to officials to demonstrate their compliance for a certain period. That has all been done - how can it be corrected now - or is vindication by SCOTUS considered sufficient? Will the Commisioners in question face any consequences?

https://i.imgur.com/V4sW2dC.jpgYes, I'm comfortable calling child rapists, 'outcasts', and treating them as social inferiors. This isn't about denying someone marriage. That battle is already over. This is about denying service to specific groups who are typically the target of cruel bullies who use whatever tactics they can to continue to oppress them.If a Muslim artist who did operated a public business decided he wasn't going to paint portraits of Jewish couples because he didn't want to be seen to support the propagation of Jews...that'd be a problem too - even if the Muslim's beliefs are religious and sincerely held. Actually it also denies the right of Atheists, Muslims and Jews to deny service to Christians, Hindus or Sikhs. The only difference is that Christians don't need to worry so much about that because being in much larger numbers than Muslims or Jews etc., it would generally be a terrible business plan.Still, one day, maybe Christianity will be a minority. Then the Christians will be glad that there are protections preventing business owners using their religious freedoms to try and make their lives difficult, humiliate them etc. It was the patriotic, right wing actual Nazis that denied service to Jews.The 'Liberal Nazis' want people to be treated fairly, and to have restitution for tangible harms done to those that harmed. Be they Christians, Homosexuals, Women or Lithuanian.The 'Liberal Nazis' want to prevent law abiding, free human beings from being marginalized by the powerful majority whenever that majority decides they are the target of the year. Right now that's Jews, Muslims, Gays and Transfolk. Tomorrow it might be Christians, white grandmothers or the disabled.Because we 'Liberal Nazis' know that denying service to minorities is the tip of the iceberg and if you let it slide - the right wing Nazis...you know the Hitler loving swastika bearing fascist thugs that still actually exist... will take that inch and march a mile.I'm sure many Christians who want to refuse service are perfectly nice folk and all - but we can't let it stand. The harm to those that are bullied is greater than the harm to the bullies (deliberate or accidental) when someone stops them.I'm sure it'll be an uncomfortable time for some people, but before too long the very notion this discussion even took place will seem strange to Christians. The Supreme Court just slapped a case down in your favour because the arbitrators suggested hostility towards your religious viewpoint. 'You guys' hold SCOTUS, POTUS and the legislature and you're still worried it's going to get worse? I hope you're right. I hope the gust of change is with you, but the winds of change are generally against you and topple your ideals.

Yes, that's very wrong. It's classic right-wing fear-mongering targeted at people like you.

This would have been the point where you would have sought the evidence to verify the claim of no-go zones. I mean, I can see pictures of Dearborn with people going about their business peacefully. I see strip clubs, bars, places you can buy a bacon sandwich. I see police on the streets.I don't find citizens that live there claiming it's no-go zone. I do find right wing outlets posting images of Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan or outright photoshopped pictures claiming they are from Dearborn. But I was able to locate the source of those images and it turns out they were bullshit.So I have
1) Pictures of Dearborn looking like any other city of equal size.
2) Pictures of police in Dearborn
3) People lying about Dearborn to make it seem like its somehow a no-go zone.
4) People lying about other no-go zones in this propaganda war.So I'm going with the position that it is yet another lie about no-go zones with high confidence. You have, what? Infowars?

Well I used to live right where this video was taken (the sign in the thumbnail where you just see 'TER' in the top left was visible out my window)
Then, for a while, I lived exactly opposite to this mosque
So perhaps you need not wonder?

Thanks. Turns out it's basically the same as living in a Christian or Jewish neighbourhood.