Where should there be "The right to refuse service"?

You can conscientiously object to an action which is imposed on you, such as military service. (Several of my uncles were conscientious objectors during World War Two because they were Mennonites. They were still obligated to do their part but they worked in lumber camps instead of in a combatant role.)You can not conscientiously object to providing a service which you voluntarily provide. Objecting to a certain segment of society, as "contientious" as you might think it is, is discrimination.

The business does not "voluntarily provide" wedding cakes for gay weddings or flowers for gay weddings or photos for gay weddings. That is a service that a Christian business does not provide because it is conscientiously opposed by the Christian business owner.I am trying to define the actual situation in such a way as to provide for the Christian point of view in a hostile pagan society. But since you all insist on the rules of the hostile pagan society trumping anything Christians try to do, even to the point of telling us, as Mod did, that we are not even allowed to run a business at all ever, then you need to recognize that you are defending a tyrannical fascist form of government that deprives Christians of our rights while selectively defending the rights of a tiny minority against us. Apparently that is the kind of society many of you here want to have. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The business voluntarily provides wedding cakes, period. Its license doesn't include a list of people it can discriminate against. No. Our society is telling you that if you want to sell wedding cakes you have to sell them to everybody equally - including blacks, Mormons, Catholics, etc. If you don't want to live by society's rules you are free to tell your customers, "I'm sorry, we don't make wedding cakes." No. We're defending a form of government which prevents your minority from tyranizing other minorities.

But you are deluding yourselves because all you will accomplish is tyrannizing Christians. That's OK of course, it's always good to separate the chaff from the wheat and in this case the wheat will suffer the punishment of this developing fascist pagan society that you all favor, which is the way it ought to be. That's why Meriam Ibraham is in prison in a Muslim country, suffering for her faith. Americans/Canadians/British/Europeans will be joining her if you have your way.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

We're "tyranizing" Christians in the same way that we're tyranizing the Ku Klux Klan by refusing to allow the lynching of black people.If you can not in good conscience stop at red lights, society does not allow you to drive a car. If you can not in good conscience serve black people in your restaurant, society does not licence your restaurant. It is, in a sense, a tyrany of the majority but it's in favour of equal treatment for all minorities.

That's fine, you're just going to need a lot more prison space than is currently available. Oh maybe the FEMA camps will suffice.Or it might be a lot more efficient to get us to dig a big ditch and then shoot us so we fall into it. Yes I think that will work nicely.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Get a grip on reality. I'm talking about, at worst, revoking the license of a business owner who persistently discriminates against minorities.

quote:

---

you all insist on the rules of the hostile pagan society trumping anything Christians try to do, even to the point of telling us, as Mod did, that we are not even allowed to run a business at all ever, then you need to recognize that you are defending a tyrannical fascist form of government that deprives Christians of our rights while selectively defending the rights of a tiny minority against us. Apparently that is the kind of society many of you here want to have

---

Faith, lying really doesn't help your case.

That's inane. In the case I described I have not forgiven a man for a personal affront that was committed only two weeks ago. Your slippery slope argument is complete nonsense.

duplicate. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Coming from a woman who tells us she'd like to have her own state in which only people who agree with her version of the Bible would have any input into the political process, such statements ring quite hollow.One of the things a free people don't have to tolerate is intolerance. That you argue for the right to discriminate and your desire to live in a state where you and your pals are supreme marks you as the intolerant one. Small wonder that King James is your hero.

Then that business should not offer their services to the public. If they just have to perform their services, then they can do them on a private basis. Ah yes, the last ditch effort: Self-martyrdom.

The fact is that "intolerance" is what you all are doing. But again, that's OK, you can punish us for running afoul of your twisted rules.

What you are doing is advocating a law that discriminates against Bible believers, but that doesn't bother you.

Stopped into a diner in Nebraska in the middle of nowhere. Everyone stared; it was very uncomfortable. We were clearly not welcomed. If only the sign on the door had said "We hate outsiders", we'd have all known better.If I am going to buy a cake from someone, I want to know that they hate me if they do. I don't want a spit cake.And perhaps this is the issue; I don't like going places where I'm not welcomed. I think it would be preferable to know that I am not welcomed instead of trying to do business with someone who doesn't want mine. When I enter an establishment, the proprietor is aware that I wish to do business there, but I am not aware if they wish to do business with me; and they are forbidden from telling me.Perhaps businesses should be allowed to post listings on their door of the people who are not welcomed, but still do business with everyone all the same. This would let folks take their business where it is most welcomed but still be able to do business where it isn't.Win win?