Christians booted from Seattle shop "I'm gay, you have to leave"

[kwikphilly]

Blessings...

     In the  Book of Ephesians we are told that it is shameful to even mention what the disobedient do in secret......the enemy is rampant,so arrogant to the point of flaunting his wicked ways & blasphemous words everywhere & anywhere,he does not have to hide  in the shadows because the world is such a dark place that he can be right out in the open.......imo this is not "news" its is just repeating the things we can see and hear anytime of anyday by just going out into any public place,these are not the things I want to take in with my eyes & ears,wouldn't it be enough to say" They used profanity and spoke blasphemous words to The Christian customer......the shoe was on the other foot,etc etc etc .....

    Just my two cents,this is why I don't participate in any of these threads ,I can turn on the local news for this sort of stuff,the local channels still have to bleep out the profanities as well......I watch a Christian News Channel & listen to Christian radio,this story was not mentioned though-it is just not my idea of portraying "the Christian".....Supreme Court? Why in the world would a CHristian what to sue,why would a Christian want to get coffee at this place? 

 I'm sure many of you will talk about our rights as an American,discrimination & so on.....I imagine myself in such a situation,I know I would have just got up & left and I wouldn't spend a single moment more in that place except to leave some pamphlets on my way out....            Peace & Love in Christ Jesus,Kwik

[Running Gator]

On 10/9/2017 at 3:02 AM, shiloh357 said:

I would hate to go back to the days when someone could be denied service for the color of their skin.   We have anti-discrimination laws for a reason and they are not unreasonable..  

Actually they are unreasonable and in my opinion, unconstitutional. 

The constitution provides for equal protection from the government, not from each other. 

Anti-discrimination laws should apply only to the government and the market place should be left to work out the rest.  If enough people are bothered by a "white only" or "black only" or "men only" establishment then they will suffer the consequences. 

[Guest Butero]

On ‎10‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 3:18 PM, MorningGlory said:

Yes, I got that from AJ's post too and that's why I removed that paragraph.  It really was beyond the pale.

At the same time, it gives us a clear picture of who the enemy is.  When we water it down, we don't always realize just how evil these people are.  I can see both sides of this argument.  

[Guest Butero]

5 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

Blessings...

     In the  Book of Ephesians we are told that it is shameful to even mention what the disobedient do in secret......the enemy is rampant,so arrogant to the point of flaunting his wicked ways & blasphemous words everywhere & anywhere,he does not have to hide  in the shadows because the world is such a dark place that he can be right out in the open.......imo this is not "news" its is just repeating the things we can see and hear anytime of anyday by just going out into any public place,these are not the things I want to take in with my eyes & ears,wouldn't it be enough to say" They used profanity and spoke blasphemous words to The Christian customer......the shoe was on the other foot,etc etc etc .....

    Just my two cents,this is why I don't participate in any of these threads ,I can turn on the local news for this sort of stuff,the local channels still have to bleep out the profanities as well......I watch a Christian News Channel & listen to Christian radio,this story was not mentioned though-it is just not my idea of portraying "the Christian".....Supreme Court? Why in the world would a CHristian what to sue,why would a Christian want to get coffee at this place? 

 I'm sure many of you will talk about our rights as an American,discrimination & so on.....I imagine myself in such a situation,I know I would have just got up & left and I wouldn't spend a single moment more in that place except to leave some pamphlets on my way out....            Peace & Love in Christ Jesus,Kwik

I understand where you are coming from.  Once you hear something or see something evil, it remains.  You can't just get it out of your head.  Perhaps there should be some kind of warning not to read the article if you don't want to be offended because it contains graphic material.  I am more surprised that they would act this way, knowing that Christians have been sued because they refused to serve certain individuals.  You would think they would realize they aren't immune from the same treatment in reverse.  

[MorningGlory]

37 minutes ago, Butero said:

I understand where you are coming from.  Once you hear something or see something evil, it remains.  You can't just get it out of your head.  Perhaps there should be some kind of warning not to read the article if you don't want to be offended because it contains graphic material.  I am more surprised that they would act this way, knowing that Christians have been sued because they refused to serve certain individuals.  You would think they would realize they aren't immune from the same treatment in reverse.  

I think that posting a warning of possible offensive material is a good idea.  I also think it's important that we, as Christians, know what the enemy is doing.  I can't believe how bad things are getting or how fast.

[Guest Butero]

39 minutes ago, MorningGlory said:

I think that posting a warning of possible offensive material is a good idea.  I also think it's important that we, as Christians, know what the enemy is doing.  I can't believe how bad things are getting or how fast.

That is how I feel.  I think I have seen everything, and then someone comes along and proves me wrong with even worse behavior.  I like to know what is going on, even if it is bad, but I do know that some don't want that stuff in their head.  

[Guest shiloh357]

5 hours ago, Running Gator said:

Actually they are unreasonable and in my opinion, unconstitutional. 

The constitution provides for equal protection from the government, not from each other. 

So it is unreasonable to expect restaurants to serve Muslims?   It's perfectly fine with you if we tell them to stay out of our restaurants, our grocery and department stores and bar them from employment opportunities, housing, prevent their children from playing with non-Muslim children?

 

 

[Running Gator]

18 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

So it is unreasonable to expect restaurants to serve Muslims?   It's perfectly fine with you if we tell them to stay out of our restaurants, our grocery and department stores and bar them from employment opportunities, housing, prevent their children from playing with non-Muslim children?

 

 

It is not unreasonable to expect restaurants to serve Muslims, it is unreasonable to force restaurants to serve Muslims, or anyone else for that matter.

There is nothing in the Constitution that allows for the government to do such things to private businesses. 

 

[Guest Butero]

18 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

So it is unreasonable to expect restaurants to serve Muslims?   It's perfectly fine with you if we tell them to stay out of our restaurants, our grocery and department stores and bar them from employment opportunities, housing, prevent their children from playing with non-Muslim children?

 

 

I have to agree with R.G. on this one.  To try to force a private business owner to serve anyone they don't want to is legislating morality, something liberals always claim they don't believe in.  If I spend my money building a business, and have a personal dislike for Muslims, I should be able to refuse to serve them.  If someone down the streets wants to refuse service to me, that should be their right.  If we are truly a free society, that should give us the right to be bigots.  

I want to point something out here.  If we are going to defend anti-discrimination laws, then how can we defend the photographer that doesn't want to take pictures at a gay wedding if they have a policy of doing weddings?  It is discrimination, based on someone's religious beliefs.  The same thing applies to a bakery that does wedding cakes.  How do you deny a cake that says Henry and Steve and has two guys on the top if you make one for a couple named Andy and Betty?  It is discrimination, but based on religion.  I believe we should have the right to discriminate.  

[Guest Butero]

4 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

It is not unreasonable to expect restaurants to serve Muslims, it is unreasonable to force restaurants to serve Muslims, or anyone else for that matter.

There is nothing in the Constitution that allows for the government to do such things to private businesses. 

 

I will go further than this.  I don't think the government has any business forcing a private business to make smoking in their establishment illegal.  That should be up to the owner, and the free market should determine how that goes over.  It opens the door for another restaurant to come in next door that bans smoking.  The government needs to stay out of things like this.