Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 199

Thread: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    17,416
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by BLESSED1AmI View Post
    The goal then to push back civil rights 50 years.
    How in the world is stripping away one man's rights pushing back civil rights? Disagreement with one's beliefs is no reason to strip them of their rights to express it.
    This IGNORE button is by far one of the most useful tools I've used to keep my peace while navigating through some of the madness.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,531

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by keck553 View Post
    That’s the point. The baker isn’t refusing an off the shelf product.

    And no one gets to dictate what conviction anyone should have about a matter. Already the state has ordered this person to a re-education “camp.” This isn’t Oceana.

    Statement from the baker’s lawyer:

    Even though Jack serves all customers and simply declines to create custom cakes that express messages or celebrate events in violation of his deeply held beliefs, the government is intent on destroying him – something the Supreme Court has already told it not to do,” she said. “Neither Jack nor any other creative professionals should be targeted by the government for living consistently with their religious beliefs.”
    Right, and while it's too late for it, I think his lawyers - and him - would have had a better long-term argument if they refused the 'religious beliefs' angle (from the start), and made it purely about cake-baking-as-art.

    "Jack is an artist who expresses himself through baking, and cake decorating. As a society we don't compel artists of other forms or art to accept commissions, or threaten them, and we ought not here as well. Jack's religious beliefs are immaterial to his inherit right to express himself."

    If they can pull that off, then I'm not sure the state really wants to argue that it reserves the right to compel artists to work, or else be bankrupted, sued, 're-educated', etc.

    Of course, we have a lawyer amongst us again, so who knows how lame that strategy might turn out to be.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,495
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenris View Post
    I have no idea what a "gender transitioning cake" is. What I do know is that he's being persecuted for being a Christian.
    Makes you wonder how the media / courts would rule if the baker had the same motive but from a different religious perspective.

  4. #19

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by -SEEKING- View Post
    How in the world is stripping away one man's rights pushing back civil rights? Disagreement with one's beliefs is no reason to strip them of their rights to express it.
    Using one's professed religion as a way to strip away someone's civil rights is not righteousness. Furthermore, it violates the 2nd command upon which Yoshua said all the laws & the prophets hang. Loving one's neighbor as themselves.

    This baker is false.

  5. #20

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by BLESSED1AmI View Post
    Using one's professed religion as a way to strip away someone's civil rights is not righteousness. Furthermore, it violates the 2nd command upon which Yoshua said all the laws & the prophets hang. Loving one's neighbor as themselves.

    This baker is false.
    If you are talking about "love your neighbor as yourself" I'm not sure what that has to do with decorating a cake. We don't have to express love for our neighbor by doing exactly what they want us to do. Do you think it would violate that same commandment if the baker declined an invitation to join the two men concerned in a threesome because to do so would go against his religious beliefs?

    Whatever you or I might think of the merits of the stance the baker is taking, what's wrong with the simple idea that he is a private individual and should have the right to serve, or not serve, anyone he chooses?

  6. #21

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlyCall View Post
    I suspect that on the day of judgement God is going to push civil rights a lot further back. I also suspect God will side with the man who refused to partake in a so called wedding that God would not attend nor bake a cake for.

    Let me ask you a question. Jesus was a carpenter and He served the public in that role. Had this transgender man come to Jesus and asked Jesus to make him a table celebrating this mans transition from a man to a woman, what do you think Jesus would have done? Would Jesus have said, well, I certainly want to protect civil rights and I certainly am in business serving the public, so sure, I will make you the table and never mind what my Father thinks of it all.

    Answer me that if you are honest enough to do so. Or is this where our example to live by, Jesus, ends and the government takes over?

    This cake maker will one day answer to God which will be final. I think he's trying to get that answer right in the here and now.
    You judge me as dishonest first with your presumed question that I can speak for Jesus? That's pathetic.

    Learn something about this case in full. It will help you realize this baker is not a Christian. He's using the claim to that faith to exercise his personal bigotry at his discretion under the banner of religious freedom. He knows nothing of scripture or he'd be a better man.
    Learn also if you wish to make the effort and take the time that this baker refused the mother of a little girl her request for a custom birthday cake. Why? The daughter, who was very young, loves rainbows. When the mother asked the cake be custom designed with rainbows Phillips refused.

    Was the little girl a lesbian? Was the mom lying because this was a cake made for a wedding between herself and another woman and this was her way of sidestepping Phillip's published refusal policy for all manner of homosexual themed products?

    Phillip's knew this gay couple for years. He served them knowing they were living together in sin.
    Phillip's isn't participating in their wedding with that cake request. How stupid would he be to think that and not then admit he participates in everything anyone who buys from his shop does with his bakery goods.
    This couple was married long before the cake request and in Massachusetts where at that time Mass. was one of the few states that permitted civil unions of homosexual couples.
    Every marriage license is a civil union contract with the state.

    Every one.

    This couple was asking for a wedding cake back in Oregon so as to celebrate with their family and friends. Phillips even refused to bake them a custom cake without any decorative writing theme or two men as toppers.

    This is why Phillip's is false and is clearly no Christian.
    Jesus said, render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. And unto God that which is God's.

    Every marriage contract, every civil union contract with the state is that which is within the domain of today's Caesar.

    The Christian knows that. That's why they also know when they stand before the altar in a church or anywhere at all and are joined together by clergy in the name of God that they are entering then into the marriage covenant God ordained. As that between one man and one woman.

    God does not ordain marriage between two men. Nor, two women.
    But two men and two women have every civil right now by "Caesar's" law to be joined together in a civil union. Be it called "marriage" by that couple or otherwise.

    The Christian knows they are not married under God's covenant. And that is all that matters.
    The reason Christianity gets a bad reputation when cases like this arise, especially with a juggernaut like false Phillips, is through the behaviors that are on public display wherein certain in the kingdom think the whole world is obligated to obey our God given rules.

    That is the behavior God will judge too. And given Phillip's age he's not long from finding that out.
    Because first he is unaware that a Christian knows the second command Yoshua gave as that upon which the laws and the prophets hang. Love your neighbor as yourself.
    If he loved God with all his heart and mind he'd have known this gay couple isn't married by God's standards. But God is aware Phillip's is in business to serve the public when he entered into a commerce contract with the state and gained a business license denoting as much.

    And then decided he would not love his gay neighbors he'd served for years knowing all that about them. Because first, Phillip's didn't know the old testament scriptures that define marriage by God's standards. So Phillip's decided to discriminate using his own.

    SCOTUS erred when siding with Phillips. But they do what they're told. There's an old saying in law schools The letter of the law shapes the world. But the freedom of interpreting what it says changes the world.

    Phillip's gave this married gay couple a wedding gift. Did you hear that in the news? Yes, you did.
    He gifted them free of charge a rainbow layer cake he'd used his artistic skills to create. And then put on display in the bakery display case.

    But after that he refused to custom make a little girls rainbow birthday layer cake.

    If Phillips wins this latest effort to exercise bigotry against the civil right of the public, wait for the next headline to once again give his bakery free publicity.
    I'm guessing blacks.
    Or, females. As he'll refuse to create a cake celebrating a woman's divorce and for a party her friends have planned.

    Time will tell. But be assured. As I've talked to this man who records every call to his shop. If SCOTUS is convened for this latest fiasco, and this Tranny being an attorney it is very likely, and Phillips wins there shall be a next time. Someone else Phillip's wants to refuse to serve using his "faith" as cause.

    Remember one thing about bigots acting in the shadow of the cross. The KKK think they're Christians too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonajero View Post
    If you are talking about "love your neighbor as yourself" I'm not sure what that has to do with decorating a cake. We don't have to express love for our neighbor by doing exactly what they want us to do. Do you think it would violate that same commandment if the baker declined an invitation to join the two men concerned in a threesome because to do so would go against his religious beliefs?

    Whatever you or I might think of the merits of the stance the baker is taking, what's wrong with the simple idea that he is a private individual and should have the right to serve, or not serve, anyone he chooses?
    That's where you're wrong.
    He's licensed with the state to be a public accommodation. He chose that.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    17,416
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Wow. Ok. Bowing out of this one.
    This IGNORE button is by far one of the most useful tools I've used to keep my peace while navigating through some of the madness.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Under the Blood of the Lamb
    Posts
    6,312
    Blog Entries
    16

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Two questions come to mind:

    1). Why don't gay couples ever target Muslim bakers?

    2). I wonder What would happen if a Christian asked a gay-owned printing business for t-shirts printed with things like:

    "Marriage Should Be Between A Man And A Woman."
    "God Created Adam And Eve, Not Adam And Steve."

    When we stand before the Judgment Seat, we will have retained only two things from our earthly life: what God gave us, and what we did with what He gave us.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,495
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by Sojourner View Post
    1). Why don't gay couples ever target Muslim bakers?
    Where I live A Muslim baker would get away with it.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,531

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by Sojourner View Post
    1). Why don't gay couples ever target Muslim bakers?
    If they get the power they seek, they will eventually, once they run out of Christians to blame (or kill, imprison), and need a new enemy (think Russian purges). Right now? Muslims are oppressed, victims, minorities, etc., etc., etc., so they get a pass. Don't expect consistency of thought.

    Re: Christians. I don't mean that this is a specifically anti-Christian campaign. It's an anti-ideology campaign, Christians are just prominent.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    32,289
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by ProDeo View Post
    Makes you wonder how the media / courts would rule if the baker had the same motive but from a different religious perspective.
    It doesn’t matter if he’s an atheist. If he asked to do something against his convictions, he has a right to say no.
    Those who seek God with all their heart will find Him and be given sight. Those who seek their own agenda will remain blind.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    32,289
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by BLESSED1AmI View Post
    Using one's professed religion as a way to strip away someone's civil rights is not righteousness. Furthermore, it violates the 2nd command upon which Yoshua said all the laws & the prophets hang. Loving one's neighbor as themselves.

    This baker is false.
    Using sin to strip away someone’s religious freedom is barbaric

    Do you think Yeshua would celebrate a gay wedding by turning water into wine?
    Those who seek God with all their heart will find Him and be given sight. Those who seek their own agenda will remain blind.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    32,289
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by BLESSED1AmI View Post
    You judge me as dishonest first with your presumed question that I can speak for Jesus? That's pathetic.

    Learn something about this case in full. It will help you realize this baker is not a Christian. He's using the claim to that faith to exercise his personal bigotry at his discretion under the banner of religious freedom. He knows nothing of scripture or he'd be a better man.
    Learn also if you wish to make the effort and take the time that this baker refused the mother of a little girl her request for a custom birthday cake. Why? The daughter, who was very young, loves rainbows. When the mother asked the cake be custom designed with rainbows Phillips refused.

    Was the little girl a lesbian? Was the mom lying because this was a cake made for a wedding between herself and another woman and this was her way of sidestepping Phillip's published refusal policy for all manner of homosexual themed products?

    Phillip's knew this gay couple for years. He served them knowing they were living together in sin.
    Phillip's isn't participating in their wedding with that cake request. How stupid would he be to think that and not then admit he participates in everything anyone who buys from his shop does with his bakery goods.
    This couple was married long before the cake request and in Massachusetts where at that time Mass. was one of the few states that permitted civil unions of homosexual couples.
    Every marriage license is a civil union contract with the state.

    Every one.

    This couple was asking for a wedding cake back in Oregon so as to celebrate with their family and friends. Phillips even refused to bake them a custom cake without any decorative writing theme or two men as toppers.

    This is why Phillip's is false and is clearly no Christian.
    Jesus said, render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. And unto God that which is God's.

    Every marriage contract, every civil union contract with the state is that which is within the domain of today's Caesar.

    The Christian knows that. That's why they also know when they stand before the altar in a church or anywhere at all and are joined together by clergy in the name of God that they are entering then into the marriage covenant God ordained. As that between one man and one woman.

    God does not ordain marriage between two men. Nor, two women.
    But two men and two women have every civil right now by "Caesar's" law to be joined together in a civil union. Be it called "marriage" by that couple or otherwise.

    The Christian knows they are not married under God's covenant. And that is all that matters.
    The reason Christianity gets a bad reputation when cases like this arise, especially with a juggernaut like false Phillips, is through the behaviors that are on public display wherein certain in the kingdom think the whole world is obligated to obey our God given rules.

    That is the behavior God will judge too. And given Phillip's age he's not long from finding that out.
    Because first he is unaware that a Christian knows the second command Yoshua gave as that upon which the laws and the prophets hang. Love your neighbor as yourself.
    If he loved God with all his heart and mind he'd have known this gay couple isn't married by God's standards. But God is aware Phillip's is in business to serve the public when he entered into a commerce contract with the state and gained a business license denoting as much.

    And then decided he would not love his gay neighbors he'd served for years knowing all that about them. Because first, Phillip's didn't know the old testament scriptures that define marriage by God's standards. So Phillip's decided to discriminate using his own.

    SCOTUS erred when siding with Phillips. But they do what they're told. There's an old saying in law schools The letter of the law shapes the world. But the freedom of interpreting what it says changes the world.

    Phillip's gave this married gay couple a wedding gift. Did you hear that in the news? Yes, you did.
    He gifted them free of charge a rainbow layer cake he'd used his artistic skills to create. And then put on display in the bakery display case.

    But after that he refused to custom make a little girls rainbow birthday layer cake.

    If Phillips wins this latest effort to exercise bigotry against the civil right of the public, wait for the next headline to once again give his bakery free publicity.
    I'm guessing blacks.
    Or, females. As he'll refuse to create a cake celebrating a woman's divorce and for a party her friends have planned.

    Time will tell. But be assured. As I've talked to this man who records every call to his shop. If SCOTUS is convened for this latest fiasco, and this Tranny being an attorney it is very likely, and Phillips wins there shall be a next time. Someone else Phillip's wants to refuse to serve using his "faith" as cause.

    Remember one thing about bigots acting in the shadow of the cross. The KKK think they're Christians too.



    That's where you're wrong.
    He's licensed with the state to be a public accommodation. He chose that.
    And of course you’re God and you get to judge whether someone belongs to Him or not. And your post is full of conjecture and assumptions. And I’m pretty sure minorities do not appreciate you pulling the race card on this one either.

    What about a waitress who wouldn’t serve Sarah Sanders? Of course that is not discrimination.
    Those who seek God with all their heart will find Him and be given sight. Those who seek their own agenda will remain blind.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    5,495
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    Quote Originally Posted by Athanasius View Post
    If they get the power they seek, they will eventually, once they run out of Christians to blame (or kill, imprison), and need a new enemy (think Russian purges). Right now? Muslims are oppressed, victims, minorities, etc., etc., etc., so they get a pass. Don't expect consistency of thought.
    So far in agreement.

    Re: Christians. I don't mean that this is a specifically anti-Christian campaign. It's an anti-ideology campaign, Christians are just prominent.
    Not only prominent but also easy targets. A Muslim, Jewish baker will get away with it. A Christian is not.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    In the slave pits of manmade Christianity, setting the captives free.
    Posts
    17,053

    Re: Christian baker vindicated by Supreme Court is back in court

    I wonder how the baker expresses his love for his gay neighbors.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 40
    Last Post: Jun 8th 2015, 11:06 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: Nov 29th 2013, 04:03 PM
  3. UK: Christian Guesthouse Owners Win Right to UK Supreme Court Appeal
    By doug3 in forum Prayer for the Persecuted Church
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Aug 16th 2012, 08:15 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •