[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

Tbf I do agree with UKIP that Christians shouldn't be forced into marrying people that they don't want to do because it goes against their Religious beliefs.

However this party is very sinister to me, and I'm not sure if that's the end of it on this discussion really.

You are right,there is a sinister dark side to this party,not as bad as it was but still enough hopefully to turn more voters off them than on them.

Like you I wouldn't trust them,Nigel Farage maybe I'd trust a bit more but not the party as a whole.

[Kizzy]

Farage is a banker, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could kick him :/

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

Was your point that business owners should have the right to refuse service to anyone? Cos I'd agree to that to a certain extent but not to the extent where you can discriminate against a person openly because of who they are.. I'm more on a 'not selling a drunk person more beer' level.

Yes - What I'm saying Withano, is that this is blowing something up out of all proportion. If a Gay guy or woman tries to order something from a supplier which is against the supplier's principles or faith, then as wrong as that may be to us, feck them - there are plenty of other suppliers eager for business, and to legislate against this crap with all the troubles in the world and the UK already in the grip of a 'Nanny State' thanks to Blair, is ridiculous in my opinion.

Maybe there wouldn't have been a problem with the Irish example of the cake had it not been for the 'Support Gay" message and same sex images.

I believe that a person has a right to be Gay and to marry same sex partners, but I also believe that in a Democracy a person of devout faith has the right to refuse such business if it genuinely compromises his beliefs.

I'm a Christian but not a Church goer and I regard Christian Extremists as OTT to be honest, but I would never advocate forcing any law on a person which makes him go against his beliefs.

There are so many alternatives now freely available to Gay people that I honestly don't know what all the fuss is about - just take your business elsewhere.

[Kizzy]

What if you're a gay Christian?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Maybe everyone who cares for Gay Rights should start having REAL perspective and instead of wishing there were no CHURCHES start PRAYING that the day doesn't come when you get your wish and there will be no Churches ONLY MOSQUES, because the day that happens - and it 1,000% will - there will also BE NO GAYS.

People like you always make the hysterical 'ISLAM IS EVIL, IT'S GONNA TAKE OVER' speeches but they never say HOW that's going to happen.

Islam is a minority religion, the mount of agnostic/atheist people alone in the UK outnumber them significantly and they aren't going to stop breeding any time soon so Islam can't become a dominant religion in the UK through pure numbers. The media is overly suspicious of anyone with islamic connections so it would be extremely difficult for an extremist to come into power unnoticed and pretty much impossible for them to enforce anything that would benefit Islamic extremism. Even if by some miracle that they could bring something like Shariah Law into effect, it wouldn't stay in effect for long. You can't take a liberal nation and then turn it into a Shariah State, it would result in anarchy and any government that tried to enforce it would be overthrown quickly plus you'd have a battle on your hands to get the Law Enforcement agencies and the Army to comply and enforce it in the first place.

Since a political path to Power isn't viable and a gradual islamification of the British Public is impossible how do you propose that Islam will '1000%' take over? Please tell me, I'm fascinated in hearing what it is you know that nobody else does.

[M X]

Originally Posted by the truth

great policy fair play. the reverse bigotry is totally out of hand....death threats and violence for anyone who has a different opinion is bang out of order

Hahahaha this whole logic is backwards and ridiculous. If you are going to have an opinion, at least try to not making yourself a laughing stock.

You are somehow suggesting that real tolerance is tolerating and embracing other peoples intolerance? Heterophobia doesn't exist, just like reverse racism doesn't exist either. (A few examples of ignorance doesn't equate to a pandemic issue that is equal to the plight of a minority for generations.)

I'm not saying that death threats or violence is appropriate or the right way to go about it, but that doesn't mean that nothing should be done either.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

What if you're a gay Christian?

What if you are? There are lots of Gay Christians. Obviously you cannot be a Gay Christian Fundamentalist anymore than you can be a Gay Muslim Fundamentalist.

I don't understand your point.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Yes - What I'm saying Withano, is that this is blowing something up out of all proportion. If a Gay guy or woman tries to order something from a supplier which is against the supplier's principles or faith, then as wrong as that may be to us, feck them - there are plenty of other suppliers eager for business, and to legislate against this crap with all the troubles in the world and the UK already in the grip of a 'Nanny State' thanks to Blair, is ridiculous in my opinion.

Maybe there wouldn't have been a problem with the Irish example of the cake had it not been for the 'Support Gay" message and same sex images.

I believe that a person has a right to be Gay and to marry same sex partners, but I also believe that in a Democracy a person of devout faith has the right to refuse such business if it genuinely compromises his beliefs.

I'm a Christian but not a Church goer and I regard Christian Extremists as OTT to be honest, but I would never advocate forcing any law on a person which makes him go against his beliefs.

There are so many alternatives now freely available to Gay people that I honestly don't know what all the fuss is about - just take your business elsewhere.

There I disagree, in my view such people should not even be allowed to be in such a business and cause offence to others who are simply legitimately seeking to do business that the rest of society can.
That is discrimination and should be wrong in any circumstances.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

There I disagree, in my view such people should not even be allowed to be in such a business and cause offence to others who are simply legitimately seeking to do business that the rest of society can.
That is discrimination and should be wrong in any circumstances.

And here we have the problem Joey:

Christians - even Fundamentalist ones - were learning trades and skills and building up businesses for many, many centuries BEFORE homosexuality became legal.

Christian Fundamentalists beliefs are their raison d'etre (the same reason why some Christians are beheaded by IS because they will not renounce their faith) and therefore certain developments in the modern world do not alter their perception of their Holy Book or their devout adherence to its scripture.

So if we have a, say, Cake making business, as the Irish example, which has been in one Christian family for generations, and a Gay couple enter and ask for a Wedding Cake making complete with slogan; "Support Gay Marriage".

What you are maintaining is that the Cake shop owner should either be;

A) Forced by Law to accept the Order and process it
B) Be prosecuted under the law if he refuses to accept the Order and process it.
C) Should be prevented by law from being in the business he and his family have owned and run for over 100 years.

Now who is DISCRIMINATING against who?

The OWNER turns down the the order from the prospective customer because it compromises his religious beliefs.

The customer is offended by this.

I know we are generalising here, but Why is the customer offended?

If the owner has explained in a cordial and polite way just WHY he cannot accept the order, then why do we need legislation?

Why can't the customer just take his order to a NON-CHRISTIAN cake shop?

[the truth]

Originally Posted by MichaelSpears

Hahahaha this whole logic is backwards and ridiculous. If you are going to have an opinion, at least try to not making yourself a laughing stock.

You are somehow suggesting that real tolerance is tolerating and embracing other peoples intolerance? Heterophobia doesn't exist, just like reverse racism doesn't exist either. (A few examples of ignorance doesn't equate to a pandemic issue that is equal to the plight of a minority for generations.)

I'm not saying that death threats or violence is appropriate or the right way to go about it, but that doesn't mean that nothing should be done either.

im saying death threats are wrong on either side, you on the other hand are mocking death threats made against Christians?

[the truth]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

And here we have the problem Joey:

Christians - even Fundamentalist ones - were learning trades and skills and building up businesses for many, many centuries BEFORE homosexuality became legal.

Christian Fundamentalists beliefs are their raison d'etre (the same reason why some Christians are beheaded by IS because they will not renounce their faith) and therefore certain developments in the modern world do not alter their perception of their Holy Book or their devout adherence to its scripture.

So if we have a, say, Cake making business, as the Irish example, which has been in one Christian family for generations, and a Gay couple enter and ask for a Wedding Cake making complete with slogan; "Support Gay Marriage".

What you are maintaining is that the Cake shop owner should either be;

A) Forced by Law to accept the Order and process it
B) Be prosecuted under the law if he refuses to accept the Order and process it.
C) Should be prevented by law from being in the business he and his family have owned and run for over 100 years.

Now who is DISCRIMINATING against who?

The OWNER turns down the the order from the prospective customer because it compromises his religious beliefs.

The customer is offended by this.

I know we are generalising here, but Why is the customer offended?

If the owner has explained in a cordial and polite way just WHY he cannot accept the order, then why do we need legislation?

Why can't the customer just take his order to a NON-CHRISTIAN cake shop?

exactly.....anyone with a religious belief that says they don't want to support gay ,marriage should be left alone without death threats....sadly some radical gay rights activists literally want their cake and eat it

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The simple truth is; that no one should be FORCED to do anything by law if it is in genuine conflict with their beliefs - religious or otherwise - if there are viable alternatives available.

There is a simple reason why people are FORCED to do things by law, irrespective of religion. It is because The law is paramount.

In your example, all I would need to do would be create a religion that believed murder was a valid option if I disagreed with someone, and I then could not be prosecuted for it. Completely unworkable and that is why all religious groups, or any other group for that matter must abide by the law.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

There is a simple reason why people are FORCED to do things by law, irrespective of religion. It is because The law is paramount.

In your example, all I would need to do would be create a religion that believed murder was a valid option if I disagreed with someone, and I then could not be prosecuted for it. Completely unworkable and that is why all religious groups, or any other group for that matter must abide by the law.

that's false argument, or a false dichotomy
the law does not force people to agree to gay marriage, in this case individuals are allowed as in many cases to simply not conform and agree on grounds of religious consciousness. the only people breaking the law are radical gay activists making death threats. these people should be locked up.

There is also a distinction to be drawn between old and new testament. The new convenant of Christianity over rode the hard line of the old testament in many key areas. fundamentally Christ and his life and death allowed repentance, forgiveness and redemption. I have read the book and I find nothing of Christ denouncing homosexuality either. Though some people choose to look at the old testament, I don't. I think homosexuality is fine as far as Im concerned. frankly if 2 men or 2 women choose to love each other have sex together etc its none of my business

The new covenant is spoken about first in the book of Jeremiah. The old covenant that God had established with His people required obedience to the Old Testament Mosaic law. Because the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), the law required that people perform rituals and sacrifices in order to please God and remain in His grace. The prophet Jeremiah predicted that there would be a time when God would make a new covenant with the nation of Israel.

"‘The day will come,’ says the Lord, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. . . . But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,’ says the Lord. ‘I will put my law in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people’" (Jeremiah 31:31, 33). Jesus Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses (Matthew 5:17) and create a new covenant between God and His people. The old covenant was written in stone, but the new covenant is written on our hearts, made possible only by faith in Christ, who shed His own blood to atone for the sins of the world. Luke 22:20 (ESV) says, "And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, ‘This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.’"

Now that we are under the new covenant, we are not under the penalty of the law. We are now given the opportunity to receive salvation as a free gift (Ephesians 2:8-9). Through the life-giving Holy Spirit who lives in all believers (Romans 8:9-11), we can now share in the inheritance of Christ and enjoy a permanent, unbroken relationship with God. Hebrews 9:15 declares, “For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that He has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.”

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/new-cove...#ixzz3Ykq3D4gS

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Yes - What I'm saying Withano, is that this is blowing something up out of all proportion. If a Gay guy or woman tries to order something from a supplier which is against the supplier's principles or faith, then as wrong as that may be to us, feck them - there are plenty of other suppliers eager for business, and to legislate against this crap with all the troubles in the world and the UK already in the grip of a 'Nanny State' thanks to Blair, is ridiculous in my opinion.

Maybe there wouldn't have been a problem with the Irish example of the cake had it not been for the 'Support Gay" message and same sex images.

I believe that a person has a right to be Gay and to marry same sex partners, but I also believe that in a Democracy a person of devout faith has the right to refuse such business if it genuinely compromises his beliefs.

I'm a Christian but not a Church goer and I regard Christian Extremists as OTT to be honest, but I would never advocate forcing any law on a person which makes him go against his beliefs.

There are so many alternatives now freely available to Gay people that I honestly don't know what all the fuss is about - just take your business elsewhere.

I would 100% agree with you if there was one single church that follows every single thing that the bible says. However, in the Uk at least, there is not. If a church can pick and choose which passages to follow to protect the rights of women, they should find a way to support the rights of all humans too. If there was a church that followed every single passage down to the last detail, I'd let them off.

I'm also Christian but believe that morality trumps ignorance and some people, especially including the people who are in UKIP and those that support UKIP need to grow up! They're just backward and old-fashioned. This policy isn't the final straw, it is just an extra insult on top of a long line of mistakes.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Withano

I would 100% agree with you if there was one single church that follows every single thing that the bible says. However, in the Uk at least, there is not. If a church can pick and choose which passages to follow to protect the rights of women, they should find a way to support the rights of all humans too. If there was a church that followed every single passage down to the last detail, I'd let them off.

I'm also Christian but believe that morality trumps ignorance and some people, especially including the people who are in UKIP and those that support UKIP need to grow up! They're just backward and old-fashioned. This policy isn't the final straw, it is just an extra insult on top of a long line of mistakes.

the extremists on all sides who threaten death and violence are all out of order

[Withano]

Originally Posted by the truth

the extremists on all sides who threaten death and violence are all out of order

obviously.. why did you quote me? haha.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by the truth

that's false argument, or a false dichotomy
the law does not force people to agree to gay marriage, in this case individuals are allowed as in many cases to simply not conform and agree on grounds of religious consciousness. the only people breaking the law are radical gay activists making death threats. these people should be locked up.

There is also a distinction to be drawn between old and new testament. The new convenant of Christianity over rode the hard line of the old testament in many key areas. fundamentally Christ and his life and death allowed repentance, forgiveness and redemption. I have read the book and I find nothing of Christ denouncing homosexuality either. Though some people choose to look at the old testament, I don't. I think homosexuality is fine as far as Im concerned. frankly if 2 men or 2 women choose to love each other have sex together etc its none of my business

The new covenant is spoken about first in the book of Jeremiah. The old covenant that God had established with His people required obedience to the Old Testament Mosaic law. Because the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), the law required that people perform rituals and sacrifices in order to please God and remain in His grace. The prophet Jeremiah predicted that there would be a time when God would make a new covenant with the nation of Israel.

"‘The day will come,’ says the Lord, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. . . . But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,’ says the Lord. ‘I will put my law in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people’" (Jeremiah 31:31, 33). Jesus Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses (Matthew 5:17) and create a new covenant between God and His people. The old covenant was written in stone, but the new covenant is written on our hearts, made possible only by faith in Christ, who shed His own blood to atone for the sins of the world. Luke 22:20 (ESV) says, "And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, ‘This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.’"

Now that we are under the new covenant, we are not under the penalty of the law. We are now given the opportunity to receive salvation as a free gift (Ephesians 2:8-9). Through the life-giving Holy Spirit who lives in all believers (Romans 8:9-11), we can now share in the inheritance of Christ and enjoy a permanent, unbroken relationship with God. Hebrews 9:15 declares, “For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that He has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.”

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/new-cove...#ixzz3Ykq3D4gS

With respect, my argument is anything but false. NO individual is above the law, and certainly not one who hides behind religion. Kirk stated that people should be exempt from law if it conflicted with their religious beliefs. I merely stated the reality which is that religion CANNOT be used as an excuse not to abide by the laws of the land.

Also, Farage would be on dangerous ground if he attempted to exempt a religious group from the law as it would create an incredibly dangerous legal precedent. Thank god he has no chance of getting into power

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

"It follows a furore over a Christian bakery in Northern Ireland which was taken to court accused of discrimination after cancelling an order to make a cake featuring the Sesame Street characters Bert and Ernie arm in arm under the slogan “support gay marriage”.
That case led to attempts to change the law in the Province to allow individuals and businesses an exclusion from discrimination law to enable them to refuse to provide services if they go against their religious convictions."

GROAN

Where does all this B.S end?

Should a Jewish PRINTING FIRM be FORCED by law to accept an order from a NEO-NAZI Organisation to print leaflets extolling the virtues of Adolf Hitler and denying the Holocaust?

Should a Bakery owned by BLACKS similarly be forced by law to HAVE to bake an anniversary cake for the Klu Klux Klan replete with a blackman hanging from a tree in glorious technicoloured icing?
Where does this all end?

Will we see good natured LGBT social events FORCED by law to allow known HOMOPHOBIC troublemaker thugs in?

I have associated with Gay people for decades, attended 'All Dayer's' and 'All Nighter's' at Gay Nightclubs from 'Heroes' in Manchester, to 'Rockshots' in Leeds, to 'Heaven' in London, ACTIVELY supported and CAMPAIGNED for 'CHE' - the' Campaign For Homosexual Equality' back in the 80's, and still have very close and dear Gay friends, but this is all BS. - a political 'Mountain out of a molehill' being seized upon by anti-UKIP bodies for their own ends to make political capital out of.

The simple truth is; that no one should be FORCED to do anything by law if it is in genuine conflict with their beliefs - religious or otherwise - if there are viable alternatives available.

Gays - like 'Straights' can marry in a Register Office or the Elvis' (non) Chapel in Vegas or their own front room.

If rebuffed by ANYONE, most Gays who I know would SCATHINGLY and WITHERINGLY tell them what to do with their 'Service' then turn on their heels and go elsewhere.

I don't think the law should be used to compel companies to provide services to people or groups that offend their religious beliefs, the companies in question should always have a choice whom they wish to do business with and should should be able to politely refuse the work from such groups.

We should always have the freedom in business to choose where our business goes and it would not go to people with whose views we find offensive.

On the flip to that though when it concerns a person who works for a company and that person is discriminated against because he or she has views which are at odds to the boss or company owner, well that is unacceptable as the person is employed to do a job of work and their personal views in that situation are irreverent .

In fact I think there is a law passed recently in Ireland which reinforces this actual situation.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Farage is a banker, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could kick him :/

er no kizzy he is a politician. a long time ago he was a trader on the stock exchange

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

And here we have the problem Joey:

Christians - even Fundamentalist ones - were learning trades and skills and building up businesses for many, many centuries BEFORE homosexuality became legal.

Christian Fundamentalists beliefs are their raison d'etre (the same reason why some Christians are beheaded by IS because they will not renounce their faith) and therefore certain developments in the modern world do not alter their perception of their Holy Book or their devout adherence to its scripture.

So if we have a, say, Cake making business, as the Irish example, which has been in one Christian family for generations, and a Gay couple enter and ask for a Wedding Cake making complete with slogan; "Support Gay Marriage".


What you are maintaining is that the Cake shop owner should either be;

A) Forced by Law to accept the Order and process it
B) Be prosecuted under the law if he refuses to accept the Order and process it.
C) Should be prevented by law from being in the business he and his family have owned and run for over 100 years.

Now who is DISCRIMINATING against who?

The OWNER turns down the the order from the prospective customer because it compromises his religious beliefs.

The customer is offended by this.

I know we are generalising here, but Why is the customer offended?

If the owner has explained in a cordial and polite way just WHY he cannot accept the order, then why do we need legislation?

Why can't the customer just take his order to a NON-CHRISTIAN cake shop?

No, not for me, if someone is in business, a public business where they want the custom of the public,then that is what they should provide, for all.
If they cannot, they should not be allowed to disciminate agains any people who are not and have not done anything illegal.

They have their rights to their views personally, not to push them down others throats in a business intended to attract custom from the UK citizenship,no way.

Better not to have such people in business in the first place if they would so firmly 'force' their views on others and discriminate.
The public have the right to choose where they take their custom, unless someone has threatened a business owner or their staff,all businessess wanting the publics custom should serve whoever approaches them.

No one doing nothing illegal, should be made to feel wrong or segregated for their feelings or relationships by anyone, in business or even otherwise.
Any legal protection, in this instance, should be for the potential customers,not some apparantly bigoted business people.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

No, not for me, if someone is in business, a public business where they want the custom of the public,then that is what they should provide, for all.
If they cannot, they should not be allowed to disciminate agains any people who are not and have not done anything illegal.

They have their rights to their views personally, not to push them down others throats in a business intended to attract custom from the UK citizenship,no way.

Better not to have such people in business in the first place if they would so firmly 'force' their views on others and discriminate.
The public have the right to choose where they take their custom, unless someone has threatened a business owner or their staff,all businessess wanting the publics custom should serve whoever approaches them.

No one doing nothing illegal, should be made to feel wrong or segregated for their feelings or relationships by anyone, in business or even otherwise.
Any legal protection, in this instance, should be for the potential customers,not some apparantly bigoted business people.

So you are in favour then of forcing by law, all the Synagogues and Mosques in the UK to MARRY gay people? Sincere Good Luck with that.

I couldn't really care less about whether Gays want to get married, order cakes specially dedicated with 'Pro Gay Marriage' motifs, or whether extremist Christians have a 'legal' right to refuse such requests. What I am totally bewildered by (though not surprised) is why this nonsense has been, and is being, blown up out of all proportion.

You write that; "No one doing nothing illegal, should be made to feel wrong or segregated for their feelings or relationships by anyone" - Yet does this NOT also include the business owner?

Are they not now as we speak being made to 'feel wrong' and 'being segregated for their feelings' and religious convictions'?

As 'The Truth' says, some hitherto ordinary decent, law-abiding business owners are now even receiving death threats and being ostracised for being compelled to adhere to their faith.

I would advocate a simple solution in which Fundamentalist Christian business owners erect signs stating (in nice polite terms) their beliefs, and apologising for not being able to cater for X, Y & Z . but I believe this would only lay them open to 1933 type "Judenboykott" and all the ensuing hatred which follows.

I have stated many times that I believe that the 'Law is the Law' and that it cannot be 'cherry picked, bent, twisted or re-shaped to suit our own personal prejudices and whims, so if it is current law that Christian Fundamentalist business owners MUST accept orders from anyone in spite of any conflict with 'religious' convictions, then they must do so, until such time as they suceed in having such a law democratically rescinded.

I have a deep uncomfortable feeling though, that this matter is just another example of a very real and sinister 'anti-Christian' movement in this country - borne surreptitiously by parties who have no other agenda than to destroy Christianity in this country, and usurp it.

I defy anyone on here to explain just why Christianity - the most peaceful of all religions - is the recipient of more vitriol than any other religion?

Christian Fundamentalists may wrongly be electing not to bake cakes for Gays, but they are NOT throwing them off the roofs of 12 storey buildings, and Gay people CAN take their business elsewhere.

What should be a trivial matter is being used to make political capital by sinister parties.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

There is a simple reason why people are FORCED to do things by law, irrespective of religion. It is because The law is paramount.

In your example, all I would need to do would be create a religion that believed murder was a valid option if I disagreed with someone, and I then could not be prosecuted for it. Completely unworkable and that is why all religious groups, or any other group for that matter must abide by the law.

Exactly.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

I don't think the law should be used to compel companies to provide services to people or groups that offend their religious beliefs, the companies in question should always have a choice whom they wish to do business with and should should be able to politely refuse the work from such groups.

We should always have the freedom in business to choose where our business goes and it would not go to people with whose views we find offensive.

On the flip to that though when it concerns a person who works for a company and that person is discriminated against because he or she has views which are at odds to the boss or company owner, well that is unacceptable as the person is employed to do a job of work and their personal views in that situation are irreverent .

In fact I think there is a law passed recently in Ireland which reinforces this actual situation.

Are you talking about the republic of Ireland or the North? and what law are you talking about? As far as I'm aware there was talk about a "conscience law" similar to what Nigel Farage wants after the printer story but certainly that's not been passed

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

So you are in favour then of forcing by law, all the Synagogues and Mosques in the UK to MARRY gay people? Sincere Good Luck with that.

I couldn't really care less about whether Gays want to get married, order cakes specially dedicated with 'Pro Gay Marriage' motifs, or whether extremist Christians have a 'legal' right to refuse such requests. What I am totally bewildered by (though not surprised) is why this nonsense has been, and is being, blown up out of all proportion.

You write that; "No one doing nothing illegal, should be made to feel wrong or segregated for their feelings or relationships by anyone" - Yet does this NOT also include the business owner?

Are they not now as we speak being made to 'feel wrong' and 'being segregated for their feelings' and religious convictions'?

As 'The Truth' says, some hitherto ordinary decent, law-abiding business owners are now even receiving death threats and being ostracised for being compelled to adhere to their faith.

I would advocate a simple solution in which Fundamentalist Christian business owners erect signs stating (in nice polite terms) their beliefs, and apologising for not being able to cater for X, Y & Z . but I believe this would only lay them open to 1933 type "Judenboykott" and all the ensuing hatred which follows.

I have stated many times that I believe that the 'Law is the Law' and that it cannot be 'cherry picked, bent, twisted or re-shaped to suit our own personal prejudices and whims, so if it is current law that Christian Fundamentalist business owners MUST accept orders from anyone in spite of any conflict with 'religious' convictions, then they must do so, until such time as they suceed in having such a law democratically rescinded.

I have a deep uncomfortable feeling though, that this matter is just another example of a very real and sinister 'anti-Christian' movement in this country - borne surreptitiously by parties who have no other agenda than to destroy Christianity in this country, and usurp it.

I defy anyone on here to explain just why Christianity - the most peaceful of all religions - is the recipient of more vitriol than any other religion?

Christian Fundamentalists may wrongly be electing not to bake cakes for Gays, but they are NOT throwing them off the roofs of 12 storey buildings, and Gay people CAN take their business elsewhere.

What should be a trivial matter is being used to make political capital by sinister parties.

Churches are not a business Kirk, really.

You were on about cake shop owners and people in business serving the public.

Churches are the biggest of hypocrites anyway in my view, I am a Roman Catholic,I love still the mass and especially the Easter services, that however is not a business.
I can go to Church or not go to church,I don't give custom to a church,I am member of a Church not a customer.

All my post was on about was people operating a business open to the public, my response again to you was to the cake shop scenario.
That is a business, Churches, Mosques and Synagogues are places of 'worship' not 'shops' and other businesses.

The hypocrisy of the churches however are that they will happily take direct debits,collection plate money, donations from gay people and gay couples in relationships too, and then would segregate same from certain sacramental elements of the Church/Faith.
I myself think that totally wrong in the 21st century,however unfortunately legislation would be very unwise to force a change, although in my view it could be the right thing to do.

As again back now to people in business, that will involve the gathering of custom from UK citizens, so no, they should not be allowed to discriminate and refuse service on those grounds of personal faith.

Not so long ago, in my faith, holydays had to be strictly observed,such as good friday, Easter sunday and certain Saints days.
Now,(and not because of other religions from around the world),that doesn't matter as to business, Christians have to work sundays, and any other so called holydays,they have to put aside their personal religious views to be employed.
The same should apply to people in business.
They should have to put aside their religious personal views to 'serve' all the public from the business they choose themselves to go into and set up.

[Northern Monkey]

I think it should be totally up to the cake shop what content they will print on their cakes.If they find something offensive then they should have the right to decline to make that cake.Iirc the gay men had been customers in the past of that shop and the owner had no problem taking their business before,So they had nothing against these people,Just the content which they had been told to put on their cake.
If it is the company's policy not to make cakes with offensive slogans on and this cake WAS offensive to them then they should be free to refuse to make a cake with it on.