Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 199

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

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,740
    Blog Entries
    2

    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.
    Is it loving to bake a cake and put the homosexual groom-groom topper on it and say nothing about one's faith?

    He's also been asked, according to the article to bake a "Satan" cake with the devil on it and a functioning "sex toy" in the appropriate place.

    Should he bake that cake? Or would that be unloving?
    ".....it's your nickel"

  2. #32

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

    Quote Originally Posted by jayne View Post
    Is it loving to bake a cake and put the homosexual groom-groom topper on it and say nothing about one's faith?

    He's also been asked, according to the article to bake a "Satan" cake with the devil on it and a functioning "sex toy" in the appropriate place.

    Should he bake that cake? Or would that be unloving?
    The law already entitled him to refuse to make a cake with obscene messaging.

    A female baker in the same state and before this encounter with the two long time customers and Phillips was asked to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple.
    She did what Phillips could have done and should have were he to follow a Christian example as a baker.
    She agreed to bake the cake because she's in business as a baker. However, she informed the customer that she had a public display of toppers and icings for sale also. And that they were free to purchase any of those so as to put their nuptials messaging on said cake.

    The customers were satisfied.
    The same could be done for a satanist, save for the topper, or a tranny lawyer.

    And I wrongly referred to the baker as operating in Oregon. Colorado is his city. My apologies.

    June 4 - Supreme Court Rules for Baker in Gay Wedding Cake Case But Carefully Avoids Central Debate
    This 7-2 ruling is more about Colorado's biased enforcement of discrimination law than freedom of expression.

  3. #33

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sojourner View Post
    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."


    Christian Man Asks Thirteen Gay Bakeries To Bake Him Pro-Traditional Marriage Cake, And Is Denied Service By All Of Them (WATCH THE SHOCKING VIDEO)
    by Ted on December 12, 2014 in Featured, General, Highlight

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,740
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    I guess I just don't get the deeming this man to be lost and going to hell because he wouldn't make a wedding cake for a gay couple. That is what at least two of you are saying or have I misread?
    ".....it's your nickel"

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    30,496
    Blog Entries
    94

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

    Seems that some examples in this thread, are just more examples of how the world is changing, where "evil" presses against good and the evil is defended, even by Christians. Seeing more and more clear, how apostasy is taking effect.
    Slug1--out

    ~Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,~

    ~Honestly, the pain of persecution lets you KNOW you are still alive... IN Christ!~

    ~Colossians 1:28 Him we preach, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.~


    ~"In the turmoil of any chaos, all it takes is that whisper that is heard like thunder over all the noise and the chaos seems to go away, focus returns and we are comforted in knowing that God has listened to our cry for help."~


  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Dwight, IL
    Posts
    5,738
    Blog Entries
    1

    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.
    What they are doing with their “civil right” is violating the first command.

    In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity. - Rupertus Meldenius

    Read your Bible and pray every single day. - Pastor Jon Courson

    If your grace ain't greasier than a bucket full of chitlin's and gravy, you might be a legalist - an internet friend.

  7. #37

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

    Quote Originally Posted by keck553 View Post
    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.
    Please! Christian forums have members who question and imply other members are not his.
    Phillips example is what garners the opinion he's not of the faith. Did you watch the trial? I listened to the entire SCOTUS case. I've watched this case from the start. Therefore, no conjecture nor assumptions. Siding with the baker while not knowing the merits but doing so solely because Phillips claims to be Christian isn't a positive.


    And your race card accusation has no merit.

    What about a waitress who wouldn’t serve Sarah Sanders? Of course that is not discrimination.
    Non-Sequitur.

  8. #38

    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.
    I've never met the man so can't say whether he is a Christian or not. Apparently you can see and judge his heart, which is more than I can do.

    I assume he has his reasons, whatever they may be, for declining the easy option of simply taking the money and making the cake. Maybe he just finds spending time in court so much fun that he'd rather do that than just make a cake. Doesn't really matter.

    It's absurd that the state gets to decide whether or not you can make a living, and equally absurd that the state gets to decide that you have to use your creative talents, in however simplistic a nature, in a way you find abhorrent. It's not as if there aren't any other bakers who would make a cake shaped like a phallus, or with an image of the devil on it, or whatever else this man finds objectionable. It's frankly silly that some groups get a special protected status that says they can't be refused while other groups can. He's a creative man. He doesn't want to use his skills in this way or that way. Whatever defines this way or that way in this case, if you don't like his policies go find another baker. Simples. Or it would be if government would get its nose out.

  9. #39

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

    Quote Originally Posted by TrustGzus View Post
    What they are doing with their “civil right” is violating the first command.
    It's a scary thing that you put civil right in quotation marks.

    The couple in question aren't obligated to honor the first command if they're not Christian.

  10. #40

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

    Quote Originally Posted by jayne View Post
    I guess I just don't get the deeming this man to be lost and going to hell because he wouldn't make a wedding cake for a gay couple. That is what at least two of you are saying or have I misread?
    I don't speak for the other one you may be referring to. However, what you've seemed to read is not at all what I've said.

  11. #41

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonajero View Post
    I've never met the man so can't say whether he is a Christian or not. Apparently you can see and judge his heart, which is more than I can do.

    I assume he has his reasons, whatever they may be, for declining the easy option of simply taking the money and making the cake. Maybe he just finds spending time in court so much fun that he'd rather do that than just make a cake. Doesn't really matter.

    It's absurd that the state gets to decide whether or not you can make a living, and equally absurd that the state gets to decide that you have to use your creative talents, in however simplistic a nature, in a way you find abhorrent. It's not as if there aren't any other bakers who would make a cake shaped like a phallus, or with an image of the devil on it, or whatever else this man finds objectionable. It's frankly silly that some groups get a special protected status that says they can't be refused while other groups can. He's a creative man. He doesn't want to use his skills in this way or that way. Whatever defines this way or that way in this case, if you don't like his policies go find another baker. Simples. Or it would be if government would get its nose out.
    Phillips chose to be in commerce with the state when he applied for a business license so as to open a bakery and become a public accommodation.

    Certainly there are gay couples who fully target Christians in their business so as to have them refuse a service and therein bring a suit.
    However, when homosexuals were put under the protections afforded by the 14th amendment they're entitled to be served regardless of sexual orientation.

    I think the reason we don't hear about a gay couple asking and being refused a wedding cake by Muslims is either it has not been tried. Or, media doesn't report it for whatever reason. Or, maybe the reason sinner groups target Christians in business is because they feel they can take advantage thinking we're passive. And easy to bully due to the ethic they think we're to ascribe to no matter what.
    The, turn the other cheek, love your enemies, if someone tries to steal your purse give them your cloak also, prescriptions for righteous living possibly lending to fallen people thinking we're a pushover.

    Anyone who has a deep interest in this bakers issues should maybe go to YouTube and look for the full audio of the SCOTUS trial. Camera coverage is not permitted in SCOTUS hearings. However, the cases are recorded and very often made available to the public. Either at the SCOTUS website or on You Tube.
    I've listened to the trial twice and followed the case since it was first reported. Phillips should have lost this case.
    His objection to baking the cake being his artistic license right to refuse was made invalid by his own actions when his artistic creation rainbow layer cake was gifted to the gay couple by Philips himself. As a sort of consolation for not baking them a traditional size wedding cake.

    If his religious ethic was the true issue he would not have made a cake that was his artistic license on display in the display cases a wedding gift to this couple. In point of fact had Phillips held to his religious reason for refusing the cake, the long time customer couple would have left the shop empty handed.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Go Buckeyes
    Posts
    4,121

    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.
    First, what civil rights is the baker stripping away from this man? The right to shop for a cake? I don't think so. The right to be a man claiming to be a woman? I don't think so. So what civil right exactly is the baker stripping away? What am I missing?

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Go Buckeyes
    Posts
    4,121

    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.
    ^ This

    Well, please calm down. I have no idea where you get that. Speak for Jesus? You should be able to to some fair degree since He gave us so many examples to work from.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Go Buckeyes
    Posts
    4,121

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabbiKnife View Post
    I wonder how the baker expresses his love for his gay neighbors.
    In some manner that does not violate God's commands. Violating biblical commands and principles to show love is never the right thing to do. If one has a problem determining such things they should pray for wisdom.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Go Buckeyes
    Posts
    4,121

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BLESSED1AmI View Post

    The couple in question aren't obligated to honor the first command if they're not Christian.
    But if I may, when Jesus gave this command, was His audience Christian?

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
  •