MorningGlory Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 28, 2017 1 hour ago, worthy said: I LOVE family matters! Me too and Steve Urkel is my all time favorite t.v. character! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindle Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 53 Topic Count: 88 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 4,064 Content Per Day: 1.36 Reputation: 3,748 Days Won: 8 Joined: 02/23/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, MorningGlory said: Me too and Steve Urkel is my all time favorite t.v. character! Yep! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingnut- Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 39 Topic Count: 101 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 7,673 Content Per Day: 1.31 Reputation: 7,358 Days Won: 67 Joined: 04/22/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Logan said: Ok I have a question. Let's go back several months to the Christian bakers who did not want to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding. I completely agree that as a private business they should be allowed to accept or reject any customer they want for any reason. But shouldn't Walmart, as a private business, have that same right? Well Logan, in my honest opinion they should have baked the cake. By refusing to bake the cake they accomplished nothing in regards to spreading the gospel message to the lost, they just came off as judgmental. I don't refuse to sell homosexuals an appliance because they are homosexuals, instead I use the opportunity to witness. God bless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingnut- Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 39 Topic Count: 101 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 7,673 Content Per Day: 1.31 Reputation: 7,358 Days Won: 67 Joined: 04/22/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 2 hours ago, MorningGlory said: Earth to RG; MG and Wingnut are never wrong....just cooler than others. Arrogance is not a good look, btw. Well, I'm wrong quite a bit, but don't tell anyone. Definitely got the cool part down though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 1.00 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 2 hours ago, Running Gator said: Hey, if suspenders are good enough for Paul McCartney, they are good enough for me.. Simply because paul mccartney has something does not make it good enough for anyone! He was one of the members of what was basically the nsync of his time (the beatles were a boy band if there ever were a boy band). I'm sure that folks will be saying the same thing about justin timberlake in 20 or 30 years and it will be just as unwarranted then. Seeing him wear suspenders would make it more likely that i would take any that i possessed out back and burn them, though, i thankfully own no suspenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 23 Topic Count: 32 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,849 Content Per Day: 0.47 Reputation: 2,013 Days Won: 24 Joined: 07/08/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/15/1996 Share Posted May 28, 2017 32 minutes ago, wingnut- said: Well Logan, in my honest opinion they should have baked the cake. By refusing to bake the cake they accomplished nothing in regards to spreading the gospel message to the lost, they just came off as judgmental. I don't refuse to sell homosexuals an appliance because they are homosexuals, instead I use the opportunity to witness. God bless Maybe they should have but if they as Christians should have other not is not really the issue for me. The issue is if they should be forced to do so and I don't think they should. I don't think Walmart should be forced to provide service for anyone they chose not to. Aren't you invalidating their rights otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingnut- Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 39 Topic Count: 101 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 7,673 Content Per Day: 1.31 Reputation: 7,358 Days Won: 67 Joined: 04/22/2008 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 36 minutes ago, Logan said: Maybe they should have but if they as Christians should have other not is not really the issue for me. The issue is if they should be forced to do so and I don't think they should. I don't think Walmart should be forced to provide service for anyone they chose not to. Aren't you invalidating their rights otherwise? According to the law you cannot refuse service because you disagree with lifestyles or speech. Ladykay posted the legal reasons one may refuse service to someone, which covers why Walmart refused the woman service. It was because of her disruptive behavior that they had a right to do so, not the words she chose to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve_S Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Servant Followers: 25 Topic Count: 275 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 5,208 Content Per Day: 1.00 Reputation: 1,893 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/02/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 15 minutes ago, wingnut- said: According to the law you cannot refuse service because you disagree with lifestyles or speech. Ladykay posted the legal reasons one may refuse service to someone, which covers why Walmart refused the woman service. It was because of her disruptive behavior that they had a right to do so, not the words she chose to use. I believe this is according to what state you live in. There is no federal law that i know of that deals with refusal of service based on lifestyle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.70 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 5 hours ago, Steve_S said: Simply because paul mccartney has something does not make it good enough for anyone! He was one of the members of what was basically the nsync of his time (the beatles were a boy band if there ever were a boy band). I'm sure that folks will be saying the same thing about justin timberlake in 20 or 30 years and it will be just as unwarranted then. Seeing him wear suspenders would make it more likely that i would take any that i possessed out back and burn them, though, i thankfully own no suspenders. The difference between the Beatles and NSYNC is that the Beatles had talent and Nsync did not. In 20 or 30 years from now nobody will know who Nsync was and the Beatles will still being played on the radio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted May 28, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.70 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2017 5 hours ago, wingnut- said: Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, chosen to do so from among the other founders of this nation. He later became a President, as did James Madison who was closely involved in the exact terminology of the Declaration. Along with Benjamin Franklin who represented the government as an ambassador of sorts to Europe. The founders were the core group involved in all of this, how can you fail to understand this? What does any of that have to do with the fact that the Bill of Rights puts limits on the government to infringe upon rights that are ours by virtue of being human being? None of that changes the fact you are wrong when you say the Bill of Rights gives us the right to free speech or any other right listed in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts