DescentBB

TC wrote:So your logic that homosexuality and gender identity is a choice, and as such, should not be afforded a protected right, is a specious argument.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:If there is a law by which I am prosecuted for following the dictates of my conscience based on my religion, then unless there is some overruling reason that I should not be immune to such law (i.e. my religion dictates that I must steal or kill people). such a law is not in harmony with the constitution. There you have it. [/topic] (I'm on a roll! )

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Before I decide to take you thoroughly to task for this bologna, TG, I'm going to point out that you have not made an argument here, but a series of protests implying falseness. Do you have anything legitimate to show that it is wrong to understand this verse as conveying God's view on homosexuality for mankind?

You really need to rethink this, if it even matters to you (it ought to). A little humility goes a long way. I can think of 2 reasons, right off the top of my head, that you're wrong, but since you didn't actually make an argument...

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Hold everything. You're saying that God commanded his people to kill people who commit homosexuality because they didn't know what you now do about homosexuality.

I'm going to shortcut all embarrassment for you and just point out that you don't believe the Bible, so you need to avoid getting into logical debates over Biblical precedent. The Bible claims to be written by a God that does not change. We change. God does not. The bottom line is that in order to interpret scripture correctly you have to account for the claims of scripture in your interpretation/understanding. When you woke up this morning, you didn't happen to accidentally switch your shirt and your pants in getting dressed, did you?

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Sorry, Vision, I'm not doing anything wrong in refusing creative services to homosexuals. Therefore you have no grounds for prosecution. I have not infringed on their rights, because we're dealing with an instance where their perceived rights happen to overlap my legitimate rights, and unless I'm somehow doing them wrong (Which I'm not) the law has no basis for prosecution.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:I'm going to shortcut all embarrassment for you and just point out that you don't believe the Bible, so you need to avoid getting into logical debates over Biblical precedent.

29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. 30 And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!

flip wrote:Maybe, just maybe our wise and powerful Creator knew exactly how to keep the Israelites bloodline clean. They are still around you know?

flip wrote:

29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. 30 And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!

flip wrote:No Will, what that verse is saying is they carry the same DNA as murderers of the prophets, therefore they are just as likely to murder to. ...

Top Gun wrote:Also just for the record I'm still a practicing Catholic, and while I would not say that my faith is as strong as it once was, I've essentially spent my whole life learning about and discussing Bible stuffs. So yeah, I pretty much get it.

13 You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh[a]; rather, serve one another humbly in love. 14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15 If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever[c] you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.

19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.

8 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you[a] free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.[c] And so he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

5 Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.

9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.

Will Robinson wrote:

flip wrote:

29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. 30 And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!

Just an aside here...

I fired up the iPad, opened this thread and read that quote first thing.
It struck me that if Sean Hannity had a TV show back then this would have easily been said by one of his guests on the split screen directing it at the other guest...

God was so snarky! Who said this? The book of Coulter? This is like watching the Tea Party repubs attack the old GOP members...
A poignant reminder that mere people wrote the book.

King James Version - Matthew 23 wrote:29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, 30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.

New King James Version - Matthew 23 wrote: 29 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, 30 and say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.’

31 “Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt.

11 I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, “Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, with its worshipers. 2 But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.

13 The dragon[a] stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. It had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name. 2 The beast I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority. 3 One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast. 4 People worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, “Who is like the beast? Who can wage war against it?”

5 The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise its authority for forty-two months. 6 It opened its mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. 7 It was given power to wage war against God’s holy people and to conquer them. And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. 8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the Lamb’s book of life, the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:...letting the Bible have its own say about its meaning. This is logically consistent. If you deny the validity/authority of the scriptures and thus don't interpret it in accordance with the author's intent, you find yourself in a position of claiming it to mean something other than what the author does.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:TunnelCat, I don't know why you're talking social/government theory to me when I tell you that something goes against my conscience. I think I made a very good and fair presentation of the subject, and if you don't give a **** you might just say so without wasting 3 paragraphs telling me that you as society don't give a ****. Guess what? I don't give a **** if you don't give a ****. I would love not to live in a society where I can be prosecuted for going according to my conscience, because you can be sure that the threat of legal action will not effect my final decision.

Sergeant Thorne wrote:

TC wrote:So your logic that homosexuality and gender identity is a choice, and as such, should not be afforded a protected right, is a specious argument.

I said that? Are you posting on multiple forums on any day? What has you so confused?

Religion is only protected because it was determined by our founders that government needed to stay out of the business of dictating religion (or conscience, you might say). Thus our government has no authority to do anything for or against it. But I would say it can make laws to protect religious exercise from legal action, which really is the crux of this. If there is a law by which I am prosecuted for following the dictates of my conscience based on my religion, then unless there is some overruling reason that I should not be immune to such law (i.e. my religion dictates that I must steal or kill people). such a law is not in harmony with the constitution. There you have it. [/topic] (I'm on a roll! )

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Vision, anyone with an IQ above room temperature should know better than what you just said.

Spidey wrote:Holy Cow!

Religious rights aside…

There is no civil right to force someone to associate with you or compel them to do labor for you.

Civil rights only apply here if Thorne enters into a contract to provide public services…IE: a public service license.

By contract is the only way to compel someone to do work in the US, all else would break a very basic premise we all live by…you know…slavery and servitude…and all that.

Mind you, what I have been posting in this thread is dealing with the legal aspects of this issue…the ethical issues here are between Thorne and his conscience.

"The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees all people the right to "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

For the most part, courts have decided that the constitutional interest in providing equal access to public accommodations outweighs the individual liberties involved.

vision wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Vision, anyone with an IQ above room temperature should know better than what you just said.

So let me get this straight, the bible doesn't actually say homosexuals should be put to death (Lev.20:13)? They simply have a "lifestyle choice" and we should leave it at that? Is that what your god instructed you to do? Please, by all means, clear up this miscommunication with your wisdom of scripture.

vision wrote:

Sergeant Thorne wrote:...letting the Bible have its own say about its meaning. This is logically consistent. If you deny the validity/authority of the scriptures and thus don't interpret it in accordance with the author's intent, you find yourself in a position of claiming it to mean something other than what the author does.

This is going to be a huge news flash to Thorne and other bible enthusiasts: WORDS HAVE MEANINGS. If the bible says so-and-so should be killed for such-and-such, guess what? That means the bible endorses capital punishment and you should be seeking death to all homosexuals, adulterers, sabbath violators, etc. Top Gun is right on when he says you can't selectively choose which verses you want to follow and to what degree. Sorry, you loose the logic argument. Nice try though.

Spidey wrote:Well…public accommodations include such things as hotels, restaurants, taxis and such, but do not include every single kind of business. Some states and cities include more types of businesses than federal law.

And as I stated before, if Thorne was to acquire a public service license he would be obligated to provide those services to the public, regardless of race, age…etc.

.........

This from an ADA site…

Public Accommodations:

Q. What are public accommodations?

A. A public accommodation is a private entity that owns, operates, leases, or leases to, a place of public accommodation. Places of public accommodation include a wide range of entities, such as restaurants, hotels, theaters, doctors' offices, pharmacies, retail stores, museums, libraries, parks, private schools, and day care centers. Private clubs and religious organizations are exempt from the ADA's title III requirements for public accommodations.

Note the absence of general labor, manufacturing, and many service businesses.

TITLE II--INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST DISCRIMINATION IN PLACES OF PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION

SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.
(b) Each of the following establishments which serves the public is a place of public accommodation within the meaning of this title if its operations affect commerce, or if discrimination or segregation by it is supported by State action:
(1) any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, other than an establishment located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as his residence;
(2) any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises, including, but not limited to, any such facility located on the premises of any retail establishment; or any gasoline station;
(3) any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium or other place of exhibition or entertainment; and
(4) any establishment (A)(i) which is physically located within the premises of any establishment otherwise covered by this subsection, or (ii) within the premises of which is physically located any such covered establishment, and (B) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such covered establishment.
(c) The operations of an establishment affect commerce within the meaning of this title if (1) it is one of the establishments described in paragraph (1) of subsection (b); (2) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (2) of subsection (b), it serves or offers to serve interstate travelers or a substantial portion of the food which it serves, or gasoline or other products which it sells, has moved in commerce; (3) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (3) of subsection (b), it customarily presents films, performances, athletic teams, exhibitions, or other sources of entertainment which move in commerce; and (4) in the case of an establishment described in paragraph (4) of subsection (b), it is physically located within the premises of, or there is physically located within its premises, an establishment the operations of which affect commerce within the meaning of this subsection. For purposes of this section, "commerce" means travel, trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or communication among the several States, or between the District of Columbia and any State, or between any foreign country or any territory or possession and any State or the District of Columbia, or between points in the same State but through any other State or the District of Columbia or a foreign country.
(d) Discrimination or segregation by an establishment is supported by State action within the meaning of this title if such discrimination or segregation (1) is carried on under color of any law, statute, ordinance, or regulation; or (2) is carried on under color of any custom or usage required or enforced by officials of the State or political subdivision thereof; or (3) is required by action of the State or political subdivision thereof.
(e) The provisions of this title shall not apply to a private club or other establishment not in fact open to the public, except to the extent that the facilities of such establishment are made available to the customers or patrons of an establishment within the scope of subsection (b).

SEC. 202. All persons shall be entitled to be free, at any establishment or place, from discrimination or segregation of any kind on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin, if such discrimination or segregation is or purports to be required by any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, rule, or order of a State or any agency or political subdivision thereof.

flip wrote:No Slick, I was expounding . The main point (your becoming an expert at diversion) is if our choices have an effect on our DNA structures, which are then passed on, then it's an invalid argument to say that people cannot help being homosexual because it's in their DNA.