Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 199

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

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    9,244
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabbiKnife View Post
    Freedom of religious expression is not implicated by commerce, as nothing in your faith or in anyone's faith requires them to buy or sell goods.

    The religious freedom argument in this baker case is flawed.

    The freedom of speech argument is essentially unassailable.
    SCOTUS upheld his right in the last case. This shows that even in a liberal controlled court they understood the baker's right to deny service that violated his principles. I am glad that not all Christian lawyers, such as yourself, hold your view. It's a slippery slope that could lead to further restrictions on religious liberty. There are countries where preaching homosexuality is a sin is labeled a hate crime. Would you agree with them if that was the case?

    Christian evangelist was accused of a hate crime and locked up in a cell after preaching from the Bible to a gay teenager:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-gay-teenager/
    2 Ti 2:14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.

  2. #122
    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'm not trolling. For pity sake...

    I'm deadly serious. I'm asking us to think beyond our programmed indoctrination.

    I'm a strict originalist. I don't think the Feds have any dog in this hunt. I don't think states should have laws affecting intrastate commerce at all.

    The question, however, is twofold.

    One, how is baking a cake a religious expression. The first amendment argument is much stronger than the second amendment argument, which is quite weak.

    More importantly, how is the individual believer supposed to act in interaction with those we may deem the most vile? And on that note, how is their sodomy any different from our gluttony?

    Put all the constitutional issues aside. How do the actions of this baker or anyone else in a similar position impact an unbeliever toward a personal relationship with Jesus?

    gives me an idea for a different thread, one which I suspect will die for lack of interest!
    I never mentioned trolling. It never crossed my mind.

    The Feds have a dog in the fight when a state violates a person's constitutional rights, and thus the Supreme Court came into play.

    I'll say it again. I in no way believe for a second Jesus would make a gay wedding cake, therefore neither should we. Jesus hung out with the sinners, with the lost, but He never engaged in wicked activities while doing so.

    If someone said to me, I'd like to express my right to burn a flag, will you make the purchase of me if I give you the money, I'd tell them not in my lifetime. And if that offended them, so be it.

    If I knew two gay men or lesbian women who planned to get married and they asked me to attend their wedding, I would politely decline the invitation. If they were offended rather than understanding, I would consider the problem to lie with them. I would also not congratulate them nor wish them well. I would however always treat them as Christ did command us to treat others.

    Be careful for we live in a day where good is called evil and evil called good.

    Do you not know the bible, because of what it says often offends the lost. That is God doing the offending while at the same time telling the lost He loves them. Reconcile that first to understand how we should live and be.

  3. #123
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by shepherdsword View Post
    SCOTUS upheld his right in the last case. This shows that even in a liberal controlled court they understood the baker's right to deny service that violated his principles. I am glad that not all Christian lawyers, such as yourself, hold your view. It's a slippery slope that could lead to further restrictions on religious liberty. There are countries where preaching homosexuality is a sin is labeled a hate crime. Would you agree with them if that was the case?

    Christian evangelist was accused of a hate crime and locked up in a cell after preaching from the Bible to a gay teenager:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-gay-teenager/
    You clearly don’t understand my view or the reasoning of the court

    Hate crime legislation or speech crime violates the first amendment

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    32,564
    Blog Entries
    4

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabbiKnife View Post
    You clearly don’t understand my view or the reasoning of the court

    Hate crime legislation or speech crime violates the first amendment
    unless it’s hate week at the local Antifa chapter of course. Or at CNN.

    I’m sure the Nuremberg lawyers would have welcomed that into their Laws.
    Those who seek God with all their heart will find Him and be given sight. Those who seek their own agenda will remain blind.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    15,567

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

    Quote Originally Posted by shepherdsword View Post
    SCOTUS upheld his right in the last case. This shows that even in a liberal controlled court they understood the baker's right to deny service that violated his principles. I am glad that not all Christian lawyers, such as yourself, hold your view. It's a slippery slope that could lead to further restrictions on religious liberty. There are countries where preaching homosexuality is a sin is labeled a hate crime. Would you agree with them if that was the case?
    I don't think they upheld the baker's rights SW. It seemed to me it was more about scolding the Colorado state government. If they had not been so bigoted, the case very well may have gone against the baker. Nothing in the ruling, that I have read, protects any believer going forward for his actions in his own small business as he worships the Lord God.
    Matt 9:13
    13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
    NASU

  6. #126
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    3,740

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabbiKnife View Post
    Put all the constitutional issues aside. How do the actions of this baker or anyone else in a similar position impact an unbeliever toward a personal relationship with Jesus?
    I'd love an answer to this question, personally.

    It seems as if, in my observation, these discussions (across the internet / social media world, not just here) revolve around what America is related to freedoms Christians should be allowed, rather than what the church is and how we should engage the world around us.

    In other words, a fight for continued freedoms (sometimes, regardless of the impact of that fight on our Christian witness / expression of the love of Jesus to the world) rather than a fight for the souls of those around us, regardless of the personal cost (personal rights / freedoms are likely not the biggest issue on the heart of God for this generation).

    On these issues, do we think more like Paul the Apostle or Shapiro the Ideologue?
    The Rookie

    Twelve is the number of government. Thus, it is quite apropos that I am on my way towards wielding the power of twelve bars - each bar like, say, a tribe.....or a star.....or, maybe an apostle. A blue apostle. Like apostle smurfs. Does anyone remember smurfs? And all the controversy about them being from the devil? It's probably bad that I juxtaposed "apostle" and "smurf" in the same sentence. But then, I probably lost you at "blue apostle". Yes, my friends, this is what "rare jewel of a person" is actually implying. "Rare Jewel of a Person" really means, "Potentially Insane".

  7. #127
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    3,740

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

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlyCall View Post

    I'll say it again. I in no way believe for a second Jesus would make a gay wedding cake, therefore neither should we. Jesus hung out with the sinners, with the lost, but He never engaged in wicked activities while doing so.
    How is baking a wedding cake for a gay wedding a wicked activity? Is there a passage that speaks to this? There are a number of assumptions being made - about Jesus and how he would engage in commerce and trade - that don't seem to line up with how He lived and engaged the world around Him. It seems to me as if there is a superimposition of our cultural issues onto Jesus with an assumption of how He would choose to act.

    I am not asserting that baking a wedding cake for a gay marriage reception is not a "wicked act" (okay, I'm kind of implying that). It is definitely
    a violation of the man's conscience, which Jesus does care about. But I would not think that the act of baking a cake is in and of itself a sinful act.

    Be careful for we live in a day where good is called evil and evil called good.

    Do you not know the bible, because of what it says often offends the lost. That is God doing the offending while at the same time telling the lost He loves them. Reconcile that first to understand how we should live and be.
    Not backing down on the truth - about gender, sexuality, biblical morality, etc. - is a different issue, perhaps, then engaging in commerce in the midst of a fallen world.
    The Rookie

    Twelve is the number of government. Thus, it is quite apropos that I am on my way towards wielding the power of twelve bars - each bar like, say, a tribe.....or a star.....or, maybe an apostle. A blue apostle. Like apostle smurfs. Does anyone remember smurfs? And all the controversy about them being from the devil? It's probably bad that I juxtaposed "apostle" and "smurf" in the same sentence. But then, I probably lost you at "blue apostle". Yes, my friends, this is what "rare jewel of a person" is actually implying. "Rare Jewel of a Person" really means, "Potentially Insane".

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Not of this earth
    Posts
    13,908
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by the rookie View Post

    On these issues, do we think more like Paul the Apostle or Shapiro the Ideologue?
    Oh, that's kind of a cheap shot isn't it? Seriously.

    In answer to RK's question though - it doesn't.

    But I have two questions of my own:

    1. Would creating and selling them the cake impact an unbeliever toward a personal relationship with Jesus?
    2. When did we, as a society, come to believe and demand that people have a right to these kind of services?
    Day by day
    Oh Dear Lord
    Three things I pray
    To see thee more clearly
    Love thee more dearly
    Follow thee more nearly
    Day by day

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    15,567

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

    Quote Originally Posted by the rookie View Post
    How is baking a wedding cake for a gay wedding a wicked activity? Is there a passage that speaks to this? There are a number of assumptions being made - about Jesus and how he would engage in commerce and trade - that don't seem to line up with how He lived and engaged the world around Him. It seems to me as if there is a superimposition of our cultural issues onto Jesus with an assumption of how He would choose to act.

    I am not asserting that baking a wedding cake for a gay marriage reception is not a "wicked act" (okay, I'm kind of implying that). It is definitely
    a violation of the man's conscience, which Jesus does care about. But I would not think that the act of baking a cake is in and of itself a sinful act.
    It wasn't a general wedding cake. They wanted one designed specifically for a gay ceremony that was called marriage, if my memory serves me correctly. If the baker could have just sold them one off the shelf, I think he would have. Again, if my memory serves me correctly. That's how I remember it anyway.

    Edit: Yep. Remembered correctly. The baker offered to sell them off the shelf stock items he had in the store. But he wasn't going to specifically design a "wedding" cake for them to celebrate with. The guy also refused to make halloween cakes, etc. He was an artist that designed cakes for specific events.

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/sex-weddin...ry?id=55646970

    Phillips said that after Craig and Mullins introduced themselves, they told him they were looking for a cake for their wedding.

    "I realized right then that this is not a cake that I’m going to be able to design and create for them," Phillips said. "I tried to apologize to them, say, you know, 'I’ll sell you cookies, brownies, birthday cakes, anything else in my store.'"
    Phillips said the couple stormed out of his shop.
    Matt 9:13
    13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
    NASU

  10. #130
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    3,740

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

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianW View Post
    Oh, that's kind of a cheap shot isn't it? Seriously.
    I'm not looking to make a cheap shot, as the question wasn't directed towards anyone specifically. It was a sincere question, and one I ask my own students and friends often.

    In answer to RK's question though - it doesn't.

    But I have two questions of my own:

    1. Would creating and selling them the cake impact an unbeliever toward a personal relationship with Jesus?
    2. When did we, as a society, come to believe and demand that people have a right to these kind of services?
    Yes, I am not commenting on what society is demanding, I am asking what is required of us in times such as these. Is the Lord asking us to fight for our rights, or to serve, bless, pray for, and love our enemies? Again, sincere question, not loaded.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brother Mark View Post
    It wasn't a general wedding cake. They wanted one designed specifically for a gay ceremony that was called marriage, if my memory serves me correctly. If the baker could have just sold them one off the shelf, I think he would have. Again, if my memory serves me correctly. That's how I remember it anyway.
    Yes, I read the thread. I thought one person summarized it well - this was a targeted, purposeful act by some in the LGBTQ+ community. Nasty stuff. But again, how should we live and respond? What is the most critical thing here for the church to do when pressed?
    The Rookie

    Twelve is the number of government. Thus, it is quite apropos that I am on my way towards wielding the power of twelve bars - each bar like, say, a tribe.....or a star.....or, maybe an apostle. A blue apostle. Like apostle smurfs. Does anyone remember smurfs? And all the controversy about them being from the devil? It's probably bad that I juxtaposed "apostle" and "smurf" in the same sentence. But then, I probably lost you at "blue apostle". Yes, my friends, this is what "rare jewel of a person" is actually implying. "Rare Jewel of a Person" really means, "Potentially Insane".

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Bakersfield
    Posts
    4,479

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

    Quote Originally Posted by the rookie View Post
    ... It seems as if, in my observation, these discussions (across the internet / social media world, not just here) revolve around what America is related to freedoms Christians should be allowed, rather than what the church is and how we should engage the world around us. ...
    Are the freedoms people are given in America freedoms we have been give by God?

    For example ... has God given us the freedom of speech or does He put restrictions on what we are allowed by Him to say. Freedom to me means there will be no retribution or consequences to me personally (legally) from authorities for what I say. Yet Jesus said we will be held accountable for every foolish word we say.
    "He's wild, you know. Not like a tame lion."
    C.S. Lewis, "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe."

    "Oh, but sometimes the sun stays hidden for years"
    "Sometimes the sky rains night after night, When will it clear?"

    "But our Hope endures the worst of conditions"
    "It's more than our optimism, Let the earth quake"
    "Our Hope is unchanged"
    "Our Hope Endures" Natalie Grant

  12. #132
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Kansas City, MO
    Posts
    3,740

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Old man View Post
    Are the freedoms people are given in America freedoms we have been given by God?

    For example ... has God given us the freedom of speech or does He put restrictions on what we are allowed by Him to say. Freedom to me means there will be no retribution or consequences to me personally (legally) from authorities for what I say. Yet Jesus said we will be held accountable for every foolish word we say.
    Hard to say. Much of the Bible was written in the midst of totalitarian contexts. I think that sometimes we can overdo and overthink God's Sovereignty related to our governmental context and therefore accidentally over-spiritualize or moralize our freedoms. Our highest calling is not to "be free" but to "love well". The manner in which the church is to express holiness isn't the "absence of cross-contamination" as much as it is "expressing a love that is other than" and puts the truth about Jesus on display for the world to reckon with. Love that looks like His is willing to lose the battle to win the war, laying down our lives and our rights to serve and bless the broken and the weak around us.

    I think we're saying the same thing, I think....
    The Rookie

    Twelve is the number of government. Thus, it is quite apropos that I am on my way towards wielding the power of twelve bars - each bar like, say, a tribe.....or a star.....or, maybe an apostle. A blue apostle. Like apostle smurfs. Does anyone remember smurfs? And all the controversy about them being from the devil? It's probably bad that I juxtaposed "apostle" and "smurf" in the same sentence. But then, I probably lost you at "blue apostle". Yes, my friends, this is what "rare jewel of a person" is actually implying. "Rare Jewel of a Person" really means, "Potentially Insane".

  13. #133
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Brother Mark View Post
    It wasn't a general wedding cake. They wanted one designed specifically for a gay ceremony that was called marriage, if my memory serves me correctly. If the baker could have just sold them one off the shelf, I think he would have. Again, if my memory serves me correctly. That's how I remember it anyway.

    Edit: Yep. Remembered correctly. The baker offered to sell them off the shelf stock items he had in the store. But he wasn't going to specifically design a "wedding" cake for them to celebrate with. The guy also refused to make halloween cakes, etc. He was an artist that designed cakes for specific events.

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/sex-weddin...ry?id=55646970

    [/FONT][/COLOR]
    Which is a freedom of speech issue, not a freedom of religious expression issue.

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    15,567

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

    Quote Originally Posted by the rookie View Post
    Yes, I read the thread. I thought one person summarized it well - this was a targeted, purposeful act by some in the LGBTQ+ community. Nasty stuff. But again, how should we live and respond? What is the most critical thing here for the church to do when pressed?
    I thought the baker responded well. he wouldn't make a specially designed cake for a sinful act. But he would gladly sell them anything else and if they chose to use it sinfully, well that would be on them.

    There's another case of a woman that was targeted by an attorney general. She had a friend that was homosexual and she had helped him with flowers on many occasions. But when he wanted her to design flowers for his "wedding" she spoke to her husband about it and decided she couldn't do that. Her words were "I put my heart and soul in every design I do. And Rob deserves that kind of service. He is a good guy. But I could not do that specifically for a gay wedding." Rob seemed to understand but the AG saw it on facebook and went after her. I thought her response was good too.

    Like other businessmen on here, I have no problem doing business with anyone. Nor do I care what my employees engage in, in the privacy of their own homes. Not my business. (I know some of them are gay and knew it before we hired em.) I have no issue selling what I have. But if someone asked me to design something specifically that can only be used for sin, I don't see how I could do that. God causes it to rain on the just and the unjust. He gives some gifts to all men. But I don't see Him specifically designing something that can only be used sinfully.

    A lesson the Lord taught me... He had me giving to people I knew would abuse the money. Had me do it anyway. Eventually, He spoke to me and explained the lesson... "I gave my Son to the world and they abused Him. How many times did you walk on the blood of my Son Mark, before you repented?" Lesson learned. We give regardless of how people will treat the gift. We give in their best interest. Once I learned the lesson, the Lord had me be a little more careful about things, but to always remember we cannot see what God is doing in the heart of that individual. We don't know when they will repent. We don't know if they will repent. We don't know if our actions will be the actions of love that God uses to move their hearts. We simply don't know.

    So we love and we move gently with the world around us. Doesn't mean we always have to be gentle when discussing these things among ourselves. I like plain talk most of the time. I prefer it over sarcasm or knife cutting comments.

    We should serve those that are in sin in any way we can so long as we have a clear conscience about it. Do we design things that can only be used as sin? I don't think we do. But there's a lot of ways to serve and love without designing a thing that is used for and can only be used for a sinful act.
    Matt 9:13
    13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
    NASU

  15. #135
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    15,567

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabbiKnife View Post
    Which is a freedom of speech issue, not a freedom of religious expression issue.
    Not according to the bible. Whatever we do, we do as unto the Lord. It is an act of worship. And it shouldn't be according to law. It wouldn't have been a speach issue back in the day. Our forefathers would be shocked to see a man forced to make a cake for the purposes outlined in this thread. I have no doubt they would see it as religious freedom.

    The point of the bill of rights was to limit the federal government in all those areas... regulating of speach and worship were forbidden by the 1st amendment.
    Matt 9:13
    13 "But go and learn what this means: ' I DESIRE COMPASSION,AND NOT SACRIFICE,' for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
    NASU

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
  •