az mulls bill permitting business from refusing service to gays

[ayin jade]

I couldnt spell it all out in the title, but basically az is working on a bill that would permit someone from refusing service based on religious convictions. 

 

The feds are gonna be all over us lol.

 

http://www.kpho.com/story/24768832/senate-mulls-bill-boosting-right-to-refuse-service

[ayin jade]

Arizona is the only state that has passed this bill. Of course democrats and gay rights groups are alllll over this. 

 

http://www.kpho.com/story/21759005/religious-freedom-bill-riles-gay-rights-supporters

[LookingForAnswers]

What sort of a message is being sent to non-believers discriminate against people that are different than them?   I think that private businesses should be able to do this legally, but morally I think it is very wrong.

[ayin jade]

But is it right for them to target Christians and force them to make wedding cakes for a gay wedding with the intent on forcing them out of business if they refuse to do it? What about the rights of the Christian to follow their religious convictions?

[LookingForAnswers]

But is it right for them to target Christians and force them to make wedding cakes for a gay wedding with the intent on forcing them out of business if they refuse to do it? What about the rights of the Christian to follow their religious convictions?

 

That is not right either, as I said, I think legally a private business should be able to discriminate all they want.  I personally feel it is wrong morally, but should be allowed legally. I disagree that making someone a cake in any way endorses their lifestyle.   I would also be very surprised to find they are consistent on this.  Do they turn down request for baby shower cakes if the mother is not married?  Do they make wedding cakes for people who have been divorced multiple times and are getting married yet again?

[Guest shiloh357]

What sort of a message is being sent to non-believers discriminate against people that are different than them?   I think that private businesses should be able to do this legally, but morally I think it is very wrong.

It' s not a case of, "you're gay" so you are banned from my store and I will not serve you, period."    It is a matter of a gay couple coming in and asking for something that violates the religious convicitons of the store owner.

 

A  Christian bakery is not going to say, "you're gay so you cannot buy donuts at my store."  Rather, they are saying, "I cannot in good conscience as a Christian make a wedding cake to celebrate same sex marriage." 

 

This not like racial bigotry where blacks were not even allowed into certain places and were denied any and all services across the board.  This is about gays not being allowed to impose their immoral, perverse lifestyle on to Christians in a manner that forces the Christian to violate their religious convictions.

[Guest shiloh357]

 

But is it right for them to target Christians and force them to make wedding cakes for a gay wedding with the intent on forcing them out of business if they refuse to do it? What about the rights of the Christian to follow their religious convictions?

 

That is not right either, as I said, I think legally a private business should be able to discriminate all they want.  I personally feel it is wrong morally, but should be allowed legally. I disagree that making someone a cake in any way endorses their lifestyle.   I would also be very surprised to find they are consistent on this.  Do they turn down request for baby shower cakes if the mother is not married?  Do they make wedding cakes for people who have been divorced multiple times and are getting married yet again?

If an unwed mother makes the decision to keep her baby and raise the child instead of getting abortion, there is nothing immoral about making a cake to celebrate an unwed mother who made the right choice.  

 

Being divorced and getting remarried is not God's best for us, but there is nothing inherntly immoral about getting remarried.   It would be different, perhaps if someone came in and asked the bakery to make a cake that celebrates divorce.

[LookingForAnswers]

Didn't Jesus say that to marry a divorced woman, for other than unfaithfulness, was to cause the woman to commmit adultery?

Is adultery not considered immoral?

[Guest shiloh357]

Didn't Jesus say that to marry a divorced woman, for other than unfaithfulness, was to cause the woman to commmit adultery?

Is adultery not considered immoral?

You need to understand the cultural context.  Jesus was addressing the rabbinic excess and misuse of divorce.  In that culture women could be divorced for the most frivolous reasons.  Most of the time, men, especially some Rabbis would divorce their wife in order to marry a younger woman.  

 

God, doesn't recognize divorce except when one or both have been unfaithful.   But Jesus' point pertains to the frivolous divorces that the Rabbis were subjecting women to were usually divorces for no good reason.  That is what Jesus was speaking to.  

 

When women were divorced they had no other source of income.  They didn't own businesses and didn't earn the money.   Without a husband, they three options:   Get remairried, become a prostitute, or become a begger.

 

It was difficult for a previously married women, particularly if she was too old to have children, to remarry.  Men usually wanted young virgins that would be able to bear several children.  Plus a divorce for a woman was a black mark on her.  She was extremely lucky if she could get remarried.

 

But if she did remarry and since the divorce was not valid due to its frivolous nature, by remarrying she was being forced to commit adultery.  Basically a divorced woman had three really bad options in front of her.

 

Jesus was speaking to a particular issue that pertained to the behavior and attitudes of men in that particular day.  Jesus was not making a doctrinal statement about divorce that is for  all people, for all time.   Many times, Matt. 5:32 is misapplied by many in our day not realizing that Jesus was speaking to a cultural excess that happened in that day.

 

I will say this, though.   If a Christian owner of a business who on the basis of his Christian convictions, didn't approve of divorce refused, on that basis, not to do the wedding cake, he is free to do so, and that freedom should be defended.

[LookingForAnswers]

I have to say your response troubles me greatly. Can I apply this same "does not apply to me" to the pasage befoer the one on divorce about lust?

I would assume you apply this cultural difference thing to Paul's writings and have no issue with female pastors? Is that correct?