The debate "It's ok to refuse service to gays based on morals but amoral liars must be served apparently" was started by
June 25, 2018, 12:04 pm.
By the way, Nemiroff is disagreeing with this statement.
10 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 12 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Nemiroff posted 2 arguments to the agreers part.
Notanidiot, Andji and 8 visitors agree.
Nemiroff, luljeta101, tenyiyi, Argument_fightme, killer and 7 visitors disagree.
my disagreement to that issue lies only in the fact the term "participation" is taken too lightly.
if the person in question is officiating the wedding, performing at, planning, or at least physically present, I would understand. but the Baker? do they need to get permission from the person who made their chairs too? seems a little ridiculous.
but the point isnt really about the Baker, but comparing him to the reaction of certain people with the reaction to Sarah sanders being refused service in the restaurant. I also not saying much about conservatives or Christians, I haven't heard any consensus from them on this issue. the only people this applies to are the ones speaking for the administration, and those who blindly follow them.
It's clear that it's a moral crime to have a sexual relationship with another man. This is against Christian principals. But, the Bible commands to hate the act but respect the person.
If the person is to sway you from your morals than you cut that person off completely.
Participating or supporting a gay wedding is against Christian beliefs, but it doesn't mean that the person is attacking the individuals. It's just that they have boundaries.
the bible mentions lying a ton more then homosexuality