Homosexuality and Evo, Creo, and ID

And here is St. Stanislaus church showing support at the gay pride parade: That's Father Marek on the far left. He's totally awesome.Got himself excommunicated, but a cool guy nonetheless.

What's the difference between being reverend and being very reverend?I've never heard that before.Heh, reminds me of this:

How many people have to support something in order to propose a ballot?

Yeah, well, the times they are a changin'

Its very simple, Faith.Can your business provide its services to every single person that walks through the door?What's that? No, you can't make cakes for gay weddings?Oh, then you don't qualify for a business license.The rules are the same for everyone.

Does this mean that you understand that, according to the law, refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple is discrimination?I get that its all the work of the devil....But do you at least understand that it is, in fact, what the law says?

And those consequences are:1.) Do not offer your services to the public.
2.) Suck it up and make the damned cake anyways.I don't understand why a Christian business owner, when faced with these two options, cannot just make the cake with the understanding that they are only doing it to have a business license and that they are not, in fact, validating the marriage by making the cake.Can you explain why that is impossible?In Message 993, you ask: Absolutely, I would. I couldn't care less what the cake says.You know why? Making a cake doesn't validate anything.I can literally write anything on a cake and not care in the slightest because it means absolutely nothing.You could hire me to bake a cake that says: "Faith has been right this whole time and everything I've said on this thread is wrong" and it wouldn't matter to me in the slightest. Because its wrong and writing it on a cake doesn't make it right, nor does it matter.Its just icing on cake. Its literally meaningless. I'd put "The Pope is the antichrist" on a cake, IDGAF.

Everything you've said against gay people was said against black people during segregation.That should be telling.

I wasn't comparing the movement. I was comparing what you said about the groups. And my point stands:What you are saying about gay people was said about black people. Sure, why not?Have a business deny service to a person because they are a pedophile and let's see what the courts decide.There's nothing wrong with having sexual desires and people shouldn't be discriminated against for having them.Acting on them is another story when it comes to non-consenting adults, though. Hmm, I didn't scream. Feelings and desires are perfectly acceptable things to base protected classes on.You know how I know? Religion is a protected class and that is nothing but feelings and desires.I was hoping to get a explanation in response to my question in Message 1113...

Not necessarily. You can be a pedophile who has never had sex with a child.And I think if people discriminate against you based on just your sexual preference, then that should be disallowed as well.

You're assuming the pedophile has engaged in criminal activity and I am not.How about this one:"I refuse to offer you the services my business provides because you have a speeding ticket, you filthy criminal, get out of here!"Discrimination or not?

Given that its a social institution, then society gets to define it.Society has spoken. Gay people are allowed to marry now.Deal with it.

Ahem:

So more people think it should be valid than don't.That is society speaking. That is society redefining a social institution. How else would you prevent the majority from discriminating against a minority?If it was good enough for slavery then its good enough for gay marriage.

It is just as legitimate as a religious minority. Of course we do, silly.What are you talking about?