What's so bad about being gay?

[Mariolee]

As a Christian trying to reconcile the Bible's logic with real world practicality, I have a question. For most of the other laws and guidelines we live by, there's usually good reason as to why we shouldn't. God tells us not to lie, as it just digs us a deeper hole; no sex before marriage because not only does it break how special it should be between a man and a woman it also opens up health risks as well; no murder for obvious reasons. Each and every rule, when broken, has a negative consequence. I am researching and looking and I cannot find any one reason why being homosexual would lead to a negative lifestyle or consequence, or at least nothing different than if they had been heterosexual. What do you think?

[B. W.]

As a Christian trying to reconcile the Bible's logic with real world practicality, I have a question. For most of the other laws and guidelines we live by, there's usually good reason as to why we shouldn't. God tells us not to lie, as it just digs us a deeper hole; no sex before marriage because not only does it break how special it should be between a man and a woman it also opens up health risks as well; no murder for obvious reasons. Each and every rule, when broken, has a negative consequence. I am researching and looking and I cannot find any one reason why being homosexual would lead to a negative lifestyle or consequence, or at least nothing different than if they had been heterosexual. What do you think?

First, Genesis Chapter 19 gives the first clue as why it is bad about being gay...

Genesis 19:5 YLT, "...and they call unto Lot and say to him, `Where are the men who have come in unto thee to-night? bring them out unto us, and we know them." YLT

I used Young's Literal translation here because it is closest to the original text without bias. The people of Sodom wanted to Know the two Messengers sent to Lot. Besides the sexual connotation in the text resides a more-deeper expression of a prideful militant-ism, To ‘know them implies dominance of all aspects of life. They desired dominating control over everything including all personal preferences.

That is why God frowns upon being gay and warns against this lifestyle. There is a militancy associated with being gay. We have, in our own western culture the idea of Gay pride, For those of you who think this militancy is hogwash, I propose that you read the follow articles linked below:

churches changing bylaws over gay marriage-ruling

Colorado-bakery-owner-faces-up-to-a-year-in-jail-for-not-baking-cake-for-gay-wedding

court-holds-that-wedding-photographer-cannot-refuse-service-to-gay-couples

Despite what Americans really think - the suing will go on

n-j-gay-conversion-therapy-ban-challenged-in-federal-court

Christians Sued

Some of these lawsuits have been successful and others not. It is the fact of there increase demonstrates militancy of what wanting to Know Them also means... Submission complete and total...

According to the US Bill of Rights - the States must also comply with the principles set forth therein...

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The prohibiting the free exercise thereof of a person's personal religious beliefs is being force to submit to the gay pride - yes - they want to know you - dominate you....

Now look at what is happening overseas in the UK - soon coming here...

i-am-still-not-getting-what-i-want-gay-couple-suing-church-for-refusing-wed

It is the nature of homosexual militancy to seek everything one has and for all to give themselves to the full whims of homosexual pride.

Look over this blog as it list the objectives of the Gay Pride…

Blog on the subject-prediction

What gays want is:

(1) By forcing Church acceptance, the delusion that God does not condemn their sexual lifestyle choice.

(2) To silence the Church and that means all Christians from publically opposing their lifestyle, under threat of law.

(3) The destruction of the traditional two-parent, man-woman family unit, demanding marriage and family to be redefined to include hundreds of definitions and even many partners at the same time.

(4) The pretense of family so they can have children in their homes to recruit for participation in this destructive lifestyle choice or at least their passionate support for the gay lifestyle. It starts in Britain, it will come here, just as it has started in Canada; and the organized Church will mostly give in, their people are unwilling to give up their properties and wealth and the pretense of being saved.

Now read Genesis 19:5 from the YLT again:

"...and they call unto Lot and say to him, `Where are the men who have come in unto thee to-night? bring them out unto us, and we know them." YLT

I hope this is a sufficient answer for you and for those that read - WAKE UP!!!!
-
-
-

[1over137]

It's also here in central Europe and coming to my little country as well. Even people fear that kids will be taught their right to choose their gender. Kids taught this at sexual teaching in basic school. OMG.

[Ivellious]

That is why God frowns upon being gay and warns against this lifestyle. There is a militancy associated with being gay.

I have to say that is quite a broad statement. Being gay does not make you an evil, militant religion-hater. This statement is pure stereotyping based on the loudest members of a group of people. This would be akin to me saying "there is a strong white supremacist attitude associated with Germans" during WWII. When, of course, most German people were never white supremacists, even during the Nazi regime.

We have, in our own western culture the idea of Gay pride,

Two things are wrong with this. First, gay people have pride parades and advocate for their position because, historically, they are among the most persecuted groups in Christian/Jewish/Muslim dominated countries. Gay pride movements are a direct result of a widespread hate of who they are.

And second, do you consider pride celebrations of any other groups to be wrong? In case you forgot, gay pride parades and rallies are drawn from the black rights movement of the last century. Those "black pride" rallies sought to accomplish many of the same goals as the more recent gay pride parades. Were black people in America violating God's will by rallying together based on pride in who they are? Was the "militancy" associated with the black population in that era reason enough for Christians of the time to claim that God looked down upon their race? By your logic, I suppose it was.

The prohibiting the free exercise thereof of a person's personal religious beliefs is being force to submit to the gay pride - yes - they want to know you - dominate you....

I tend to disagree. As far as businesses are concerned, you cannot legally discriminate against potential clients. It has always been that way in America, though perhaps not always enforced as it should. I tend to agree that gay couples should just stay away from wedding service providers that don't like their union, but that is beside the point. Discrimination is discrimination, whether you hide behind your religious beliefs or not.

And, of course, there is a flip side. What if someone's religious belief forbids them to drink or be around the consumption of alcohol, and they drive a taxi for a living, and someone gets in their cab with a bottle of wine? Should the driver be allowed to kick them out and refuse their business because of their religious beliefs? I'd say not. Interestingly, this happened a few years back in my home state and the driver was sued for doing so. The driver lost in a landslide, with the ruling saying that if you operate a business open to the public that you don't get to impose your religious beliefs on your client list.

Now tell me, if a Nazi wanted to open a business that refused non-white people under their rights to believe what they want, would the Christians rise to defend them? How about a Muslim who refused to serve Christians? The lawsuits would be flying even faster than they are with the gay marriage issues. So I'm still not convinced that your concerns are for everyone's freedom of religion...just your own.

It is the nature of homosexual militancy to seek everything one has and for all to give themselves to the full whims of homosexual pride.

Again, talk about pure radical stereotyping. Which is odd considering I frequently hear Christians complaining that non-Christians stereotype them as all being ultra-militant zealots.

Look over this blog as it list the objectives of the Gay Pride…

Blog on the subject-prediction

Right, because the "gay handbook" clearly lists the gay agenda's objectives. Look, I don't doubt that some gay folks want these things, but on the other hand some Christians would support the idea of bombing all the Muslims on Earth just for the heck of it. So maybe looking at the most ultra-radical views of a group and blanketing those views over the whole group is a bad idea, maybe?

What gays want is:

(1) By forcing Church acceptance, the delusion that God does not condemn their sexual lifestyle choice.

(2) To silence the Church and that means all Christians from publically opposing their lifestyle, under threat of law.

I'm pretty sure most gay people would settle for a simple end to the conservative gay-hate campaign that persists in most of the country.

(3) The destruction of the traditional two-parent, man-woman family unit, demanding marriage and family to be redefined to include hundreds of definitions and even many partners at the same time.

Ironically, I've never met a gay person who likes the idea of polygamy, but I do know several straight people that think it should be legal. Funny how that works sometimes.

(4) The pretense of family so they can have children in their homes to recruit for participation in this destructive lifestyle choice or at least their passionate support for the gay lifestyle. It starts in Britain, it will come here, just as it has started in Canada; and the organized Church will mostly give in, their people are unwilling to give up their properties and wealth and the pretense of being saved.

Do you seriously think so highly of yourself that you think every single thing gays want to or do is just to screw with your life? Newsflash: most gay people don't care about what you think or what you do with your life. Can gay people not want to raise kids just for the sake of raising kids? Most humans are hard-wired to want children of their own. Are gays any different? Not a chance. Wanting a family and kids to raise has nothing to do with destroying Christianity. Get over yourselves, not everything has to be about you and your beliefs.

[B. W.]

Ivellious,

It is the militant Gay that controls the debate and that is who I was addressing.

Lust consumes and they desire total control over peoples thoughts, actions, and deeds - don't believe me - look at their propaganda they impose. Hana mentioned some in her country for crying out loud. There is a militancy in Gay Pride and that needs addressed.

IMHO - most Americans do not care if a person is gay or not - that is there personal preference and choice. We have a leave us the h-ll alone and we will leave you the H-ll alone attitude. Problem they will not leave us the H-ll alone and demand our kids be taught transgender and gay propaganda in the guise of helping a future gay become gay. They want out kids --

You know - let two men boot each other all they want - they will not have a baby. Let two women use the finger all they want - they will not have a baby - civilization dies, evolution teaches that gayness is detrimental to a species because the species will die out.

Therefore, gay militants - don't demand us to give (them) our children for recruits!
-
-
-

[1over137]

From today slovak news i learned that new strategy for human rights was postponed.

In czech republic they have it from january this year. Recently there was a big meeting in prague of gay and other people. Quite obscene. God knows how it will be in czech republic, our brothers.

[Mallz]

There's got to be a more in-depth explanation.

Could there be more elaboration and discussion on this?

[RickD]

Main Entry: 1gay
Pronunciation: \ˈgā\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French gai, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German gāhi quick, sudden
Date: 14th century
1 a : happily excited : merry <in a gay mood> b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits <a bird's gay spring song> 2 a : bright, lively <gay sunny meadows> b : brilliant in color 3 : given to social pleasures ;

I don't see anything wrong with this. What's the issue?

[FlawedIntellect]

Main Entry: 1gay
Pronunciation: \ˈgā\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French gai, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German gāhi quick, sudden
Date: 14th century
1 a : happily excited : merry <in a gay mood> b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits <a bird's gay spring song> 2 a : bright, lively <gay sunny meadows> b : brilliant in color 3 : given to social pleasures ;

I don't see anything wrong with this. What's the issue?

Wrong definition, dude. (Of course, it's quite obvious that you're joking.)
But for the sake of ruining a joke by means of being overliteral...

gay |gā|
adjective ( gayer , gayest )
1 (of a person, esp. a man) homosexual : that friend of yours, is he gay?
• relating to or used by homosexuals : feminist, black, and gay perspectives.
2 lighthearted and carefree : Nan had a gay disposition and a very pretty face.
• characterized by cheerfulness or pleasure : we had a gay old time.
• brightly colored; showy; brilliant : a gay profusion of purple and pink sweet peas.
noun
a homosexual, esp. a man.
DERIVATIVES
gayness |ˈgeɪn1s| noun
ORIGIN Middle English (sense 2) : from Old French gai, of unknown origin.
USAGE Gay meaning ‘homosexual,’ dating back to the 1930s (if not earlier), became established in the 1960s as the term preferred by homosexual men to describe themselves. It is now the standard accepted term throughout the English-speaking world. As a result, the centuries-old other senses of gay meaning either ‘carefree’ or ‘bright and showy,’ once common in speech and literature, are much less frequent. The word gay cannot be readily used unselfconsciously today in these older senses without sounding old-fashioned or arousing a sense of double entendre, despite concerted attempts by some to keep them alive. Gay in its modern sense typically refers to men ( lesbian being the standard term for homosexual women), but in some contexts it can be used of both men and women.

(According to the Oxford American Dictionaries computer app)
Take a guess what definition the topic at hand is about.

[B. W.]

BAKER WHO LOST SHOP AFTER REFUSING GAY COUPLE’S WEDDING CAKE HAS SURPRISE REACTION TO ONGOING ATTACKS: ‘MY ETERNAL HOME IS WHAT MATTERS’
Sep. 5, 2013 7:41am Billy Hallowell


The ongoing saga surrounding an Oregon-based bakery’s decision to refuse a wedding cake for a lesbian couple has had some noteworthy developments of late. Over the weekend, we reported that, following intense scrutiny and furor among gay rights advocates, Aaron and Melissa Klein were forced to close their bakery, Sweet Cakes by Melissa.

In an interview with TheBlaze on Wednesday, Melissa talked about the future of her business, her faith and the ongoing attacks that have continued to unfold. She also detailed a eerie alleged break-in that she believes is likely tied to the family’s very public battle and offered some advice for those who fear the cost of standing by their convictions.

If you’ve been following the story you know that, at the center of the debate, there are two divergent worldviews. On one side are the Kleins, Christians who say that they love everyone, but simply do not wish to support same sex marriage ceremonies by baking cakes for gay couples. On the other side are Rachel Cryer and Laurel Bowman, the lesbian couple who filed a grievance with the state of Oregon after the bakers refused their request for a wedding cake earlier this year.

One party maintains that it has every right as business owners to exercise its religious liberty, while the other believes that discrimination on the part of businesses shouldn’t be permitted. It’s a complicated case that has riled emotions on all sides.


SAYING GOODBYE TO THE SWEET CAKES BY MELISSA SHOP

Melissa told TheBlaze that she moved everything out of her shop in Gresham, Ore., on Sunday, officially shuttering the business that she and her husband spent years building. Her plan, as we reported, is to transition back to a home bakery. With five children, though, she said she’s not sure how a home bakery will fare. But considering what has unfolded, Melissa is forced to start over.

In May 2013, the baker’s problems went viral after she refused to make a cake for Cryer and Bowman’s ceremony. After media outlets across the nation picked up the story, the Kleins were inundated with angry e-mails and phone calls. In the end, Melissa said that this reaction resulted in a major loss of business.

“Just the whole being effected big time in our wedding industry part of the business — the vendors not referring us any more,” Melissa said when asked how the incident impacted her business. “We coasted it through the summer to see how it would be. We had quite a few wedding cakes that we had booked and people cancelled. The referrals that we would get, none of those came in.”

In past years, Melissa said that the family had a good cushion and that the majority of their money would come in during wedding season each summer. While this would carry the business through the winter, the stark reality was that the family’s current financial situation and the dearth of orders meant that closing the shop was a necessity, as Melissa said that she and Aaron were struggling to meet financial commitments each month.

“We had to let people go so we could try to save money,” she said. “It was a gradual thing that led us to say, ‘This is getting too hard’ — and our community where we live is not the most conservative. We didn’t get a lot of support from our fellow community people that lived in Gresham.”

Melissa believes that the battle with activists over their Christian views on gay marriage really sparked a lot of her business problems. Many regular customers seemingly boycotted, having a detrimental impact on Sweet Cakes by Melissa’s future.


HARASSMENT AND BUSINESSES CHALLENGES ARE FAR FROM OVER

The transition to a home business may also hit some snags, though — and it’s not simply because the family has give children at home. Melissa noted that there are boycott pages setup on social media, urging people to protest her new operations.

One Facebook page called, “Boycott Sweet Cakes by Melissa” has over 500 “likes” and has actively spoken out against the couple (interestingly, Melissa’s own business page has ballooned to over 7,600 “likes” during recent months). The baker fears that bullying tactics will be used to hamper her home business as well.

“They’re already planning to harass me,” she told TheBlaze. “They’re just continuously doing this. They just don’t want me to be in business at all.”
But the harassment has also come in some very eerie forms, Melissa claims. In the early morning hours on Monday, the baker claims that someone broke into the Sweet Cakes truck, a vehicle the family uses to advance its business. The truck was parked in the Kleins’ driveway. This was particularly nerve-wrecking for Melissa and Aaron, astheir home, where the truck was located, is in a highly secluded area — one that is nowhere near where their former shop.

“Somebody came up into our driveway and rummaged through our truck and took stuff out,” she said. “The really strange thing is, they didn’t steal anything, they just made a mess. It kind of was a little creepy.”

The culprit didn’t take any money, she said, which was also odd, as the truck contained cash. While she’s definitely shaken by the incident, Melissa said that she feels safe, as her husband is a hunter who is trained to use a firearm. When he’s home, she’s fine, but when Aaron is out of the house, Melissa admitted that she does get a little scared.

THE ONGOING IMPACT

In addition to losing their business, the Klein family has been impacted in other ways. Their children are now homeschooled — a decision that Melissa said she made this year following the media firestorm that erupted. And in light of the bakery’s closure, Aaron has gone back to work to help provide for the family.

The harassing e-mails haven’t stopped either. Melisa shared just a few of the messages she has received of late:

One message with the subject line “racist maggots” read, “People like you will burn in HELL, you racist pigs.“

Another read, “Your homophobic rants will not be forgotten and you will go out of business. This is the 21st century, a**holes.”

And another: “Do everyone a favor and fall off a cliff.”

One individual made it very personal: “Honey it would take a lot to make your ugly a** look good! You are ugly inside and out!”

And finally: “Maybe your god will send you some cat food to eat when you are living on the street?”

And those are just a few of the messages received over the past few days. Negative social media comments, too, have abounded.

A POSITIVE OUTLOOK

With all of the bad, has come some good, though. While Melissa is sad that people have continuously called her a hateful and mean person — labels she flatly denies — her church has been highly supportive, with people sending letters and offering up words of encouragement. The baker also believes that her faith has been restored and sustained throughout the ordeal.


http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09 ... hallenges/

This is but one example of Militant Homosexual behavior seeking dominance...

Again - Militant Homosexual Gay Pride in action ---

Genesis 19:5 YLT again:

"...and they call unto Lot and say to him, `Where are the men who have come in unto thee to-night? bring them out unto us, and we know them." YLT
-
-
-

[Jac3510]

To the OP, two things.

1. You are going about the question the wrong way. It may be true that there are usually natural consequences for breaking God's laws. So God outlaws incest, and that's a good law to keep in part because the consequences of that are the increased risk of having children with genetic defects. However, none of that is to say that the reason God outlaws any given thing is because of its consequences. That would be an ethic called "consequentialism," which, suffice it to say, we have very, very good, non-biblical reasons to reject. Thus, you shouldn't say, "I need to find out the negative consequences of this so that I can understand why God outlawed it."

2. "Being gay" is not bad. Homosexual acts are bad. The orientation is neither here nor there. The problem is whether or not we engage in any given practice.

As for the reasons God rejects homosexuality and why a secular society should as well, here are a few:

First, the bedrock institution of any viable society is the family. Therefore, anything that undermines the family undermines the society itself and ought to be shunned. The foundation of any family is marriage, and therefore, anything that undermines marriage undermines the family and therefore society itself and ought to be shunned. Homosexuality undermines marriage and therefore should be shunned.

Second, contrary to popular belief, ethics are neither a matter of religion nor preference. They are, in fact, a matter of reason, and the only and proper foundation for ethical questions is ontology--which is to say, what things actually are. I'll give you two examples--one highly controversial and one absolutely uncontested (these days) in society at large--to demonstrate this principle. A) Abortion: the central question is, "is the unborn child a living person or not?" If so, then since living persons have, by nature of what they are, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then they cannot be justifiably killed, which is to say, abortion is evil and must be outlawed. If the unborn child is not a person, then she has no right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and therefore, abortion may be considered ethically justifiable. B) Less controversially, there was a time when African-Americans were not considered human. Therefore, just as we enslave cattle today, they could be enslaved, too. Today, however, we absolutely recognize the personhood of black people, and therefore, we recognize that such practices are absolutely and positively evil.

So, again, the basis of ethics is what things are. Now, for reasons I won't go into here, sex is the union of a man and a woman in sexual intercourse. Pseudosexual acts (e.g., mutual masturbation, anal sex, oral sex, etc.) are not, in fact, sex at all. Marriage is a sexual union. Thus, homosexual marriage is an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms. For society to promote "homosexual marriage" is to promote a self-contradiction.

-------------------------

Now, the above is not to say that there are no serious consequences for accepting homosexual marriage. BW has already shown some societal examples. It's also well known that there is a significant correlation between practicing homosexuals and a range of psychiatric disorders and related problems. More generally, to embrace homosexuality is to necessarily embrace a faulty view of marriage, which undermines the family and pushes a society away from being child-centered to being adult-centered. But that could equally be--and in fact, I think is more likely--a cart before the horse issue. That is, societies that start being adult-centered rather than child-centered begin to embrace a series of positions otherwise untenable, one of which ultimately becomes the possibility of "homosexual marriage" and the acceptance of homosexuality generally. But to be adult-centered rather than child-centered is very detrimental to society. Witness the unsustainable birthrates of western countries. We will die as a culture. There is no "if" anymore. It is "when," and it is precisely because society has embraced the view that kids are something you add to your life to make it more meaningful or happier or what have you--whatever kids are, they are something of a luxury. A healthy society, however, regards children as the essence of life, of society.

And again, to embrace homosexuality is to embrace consequentialism, for which there are serious ethical ramifications. The entire political movement known as libertarianism is based on this view. The excesses of capitalism are based on this view, as are the excesses of socialism. It becomes okay to tax some people at confiscatory rates and redistribute that wealth, which results in the overall loss to society generally and a shrinking of the pie for all, so to speak. It also becomes okay to create a multibillion dollar international corporation that runs the local mom and pop shop out of business, and all of that centralizes power, which increases corruption and all that goes with that.

To be clear, I am NOT saying that embracing homosexuality causes all of those problems. I'm saying that the set of assumptions we have to make about society and ethics in order to justify embracing homosexuality lead to those things, too, and necessarily so.

The bottom line: don't look for consequences to embracing homosexuality as a basis for rejecting homosexuality. Rather, see the acceptance of homosexuality as a consequence, or symptom, if you will, of embracing more fundamental errors. That is, homosexuality is the consequence.

[B. W.]

The following article adds to what Jac mentioned about society on a downward trend.

What folks do not realize is how the left uses our own forms of laws against ourselves. This law would set a precedent for future laws in other states and even build on to the federal level. It is called, judicial activism. It is making laws by court judges to build upon that slowly are used make a final end run around the US Bill of Rights / Constitution by setting up legal precedent. The far left, has left documentation on their goal for fundamentally transforming America as a land of opportunity and freedom into Amerika to a land in ruin. How - a few points for example - One is to destroy the family and another, glorify perversions and obscenities,next, promote homosexual rights, thru activism. Other ways - ridicule - making your opponent live up to their own standards while you don't have any.

So as you read this article - consider - what so bad about being gay...

The militant homosexual movement seeks no quarter...

Critics Say Non-Discrimination Law Would Target Christians

September 5, 2013
By Todd Starnes

A bill before the San Antonio City Council that aims to protect new groups from discrimination could instead encourage bias against Christians and those who believe in traditional marriage, critics are charging.

More than 700 people turned out at City Hall to debate the proposed ordinance, which would add sexual orientation, gender identity and veteran status to existing protections against bias based on sex, race, age and religion. The proposed law has pitted gay rights activists against religious conservatives, and drawn criticism from Texas GOP heavyweights Sen. Ted Cruz and state Attorney General Greg Abbott, who charged the ordinance would trample on religious freedoms and invite lawsuits.

The Washington-based Human Rights Campaign, which bills itself as the nation’s “largest civil rights organization working to achieve equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans,” said nearly 180 other U.S. cities have similar protections. However, critics said San Antonio’s ordinance would become one of the most far-reaching in the nation.

“This is breathtakingly broad and clearly an attack on religious freedom,” said Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver, one of the groups working with local churches to defeat the ordinance. “There’s no question people will lose their jobs as a result of this. Businesses owned by Christians will be targeted for complaints under this human rights ordinance.”

Staver believes the ordinance is written so broadly that holding the belief that same-sex marriage is wrong, or even attending a church where the pastor speaks out against it could be interpreted as a bias – thus disqualifying one from working for the city.

“That kind of statement would be considered biased towards homosexuality and disable you from working at all with the city,” he said. “People who want to make a living will not be able to work with the city of San Antonio either directly or indirectly if they have any alleged bias in their background regarding so-called LGBT issues,” Staver told Fox News. “We will see a general persecution or certainly a significant discrimination against people of faith.”

Staver also said the ordinance could be read as requiring churches, as part of the public accommodation law, to allow men to use women’s restrooms in certain situations.

But San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro told The Associated Press the ordinance is “level-headed and overdue.” And Chuck Smith, executive director of the advocacy group Equality Texas, told the AP that claims the ordinance would result in religious infringement are untrue.

“In the context of public accommodation, you can say, ‘I think you’re disgusting, I think you’re going to hell – would you liked baked potatoes or fries with that order?’” he said. “It does not suppress any express of their beliefs, religious or otherwise.

A coalition of some 500 ministers organized to defeat the proposal including a number of African-American and Hispanic pastors. Steve Branson, the pastor of Village Parkway Baptist Church, said his 1,500-member congregation is frightened about the future.

“Some of us will pay a price,” Branson told Fox News. “There will be somebody going after our Christian business people. They will try to make a few people examples.”

He said the idea that Christians could be penalized for opposing gay marriage could prompt a backlash.

“The city of San Antonio will react strongly,” he predicted. “There will be recalls. This law is going to be very punitive towards believers – especially businessmen and it will have some effect on churches.”
With reporting from Associated Press

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/to ... tians.html

-

-
-
-

[Philip]

y FlawedIntellect on Thu Sep 05, 2013 9:10 am

RickD wrote:

Main Entry: 1gay
Pronunciation: \ˈgā\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French gai, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German gāhi quick, sudden
Date: 14th century
1 a : happily excited : merry <in a gay mood> b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits <a bird's gay spring song> 2 a : bright, lively <gay sunny meadows> b : brilliant in color 3 : given to social pleasures ;



I don't see anything wrong with this. What's the issue?



Wrong definition, dude. (Of course, it's quite obvious that you're joking.)
But for the sake of ruining a joke by means of being overliteral...

RICK, joking???!!! Surely you jest!

[Gman]

Hey.. What's this? Some claiming that G-d's laws have not been done away with Christ? Where is all the grace? Hmmm...

[RickD]

Hey.. What's this? Some claiming that G-d's laws have not been done away with Christ? Where is all the grace? Hmmm...

I've always wondered what the G in Gman stood for...

Gman, your profile says you're single, and live near San Francisco. You don't happen to own any rainbow flags, do you?