City Threatens to Arrest Ministers Who Refuse to Perform Same-Sex Weddings

Discussion in 'News & Current Events' started by Revmitchell, Oct 18, 2014.

  1. go2church Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    6
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The overreach would be if the city didn't enforce laws on the books, allowing this business to have a special exemption.

    If you don't want the business laws to apply to you, don't start a business or change the laws.
     
  2. Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The law it'self is the over-reach.

    "Don't start a business". :laugh:


    I can't wait until the first mosque is forced to marry two men.
     
  3. Zaac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    222
    Yes it is.
     
  4. Zaac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    222
    Perhaps this is God's way of saying that minsters and those who are supposed to enjoin people in covenant with HIM shouldn't be trying to profit off these "marriages" that don't include Him be they heterosexual or homosexual.
     
  5. Sapper Woody Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    175
    You're comparing a for profit business with a religious place of worship. No one is forcing pastors to marry gays. They are enforcing a just law that says a business cannot refuse service based on sexual orientation.

    If I disagree with same sex marriage (which I do) but own a restaurant, I can't refuse gays service. Likewise at a bank. Likewise at a grocery store. Likewise at a for profit chapel.

    It's not overreach, it's not unjust. And it's not persecution. It's a just law.
     
  6. Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm not confusing the issues. The issue, for me, is a business can refuse service to anyone. And it should not have to even give a reason.

    Recently they passed a law that you cannot allow people to smoke in your bar. As a libertarian, I bristle at this, or because I bristle at this, I became a Libertarian. I disagree with you. You should be allowed to do business with the types of clients you choose to. The free market will do a better job of weeding out hateful businesses than these stupid laws ever could hope to. And if you want to let people smoke in your bar you should be allowed to.
     
  7. carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    That'll be a hoot!

    But it will never happen. Only Christians are forced to go against their faith.
     
  8. Sapper Woody Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    175
    I agree with you on smoking. Businesses should be allowed to allow people to smoke in them if they choose.

    Now, concerning clientele, you should be able to refuse service to anyone, no reason given. But, once a reason is given, such as they are gay, you have discriminated and should be prosecuted. Same as if you refuse service to a black person for being black.

    The answer is simple. Retain a right to refuse service for any reason. Then don't give a reason.
     
  9. Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    22,016
    Likes Received:
    487
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In the end, we agree.

    Now what do we do with all them "Smoke-filled Honkey-Tonk" songs ?
     
  10. carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You should be able to refuse to serve anyone for any reason. It's your business.

    Now, before you lecture me on the law and the reasons for it, remember I'm old enough to have eaten in places where a sign was posted stating "No Colored people allowed". I objected to that policy then and I do now.

    There is also a difference between serving food and performing Holy Matrimony. At least, to me there is.

    There is nothing religious about the serving of your food. But we could pretend you are not serving a particular food item that some ethnic group likes to eat. Now they force you to stock that food whether you want to or not. You're discriminating against them by refusing to put boiled cocktoaches on your menu????????

    Just how far do we allow government to encroach on our businesses? You better have them roaches ready when I come to visit.;)
     
  11. carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Easier said than done.
     
  12. Zaac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    222
    The caveat here is that it's your business because the government gave you the tax ID and the license/permit to operate it and receive government issued currency in exchange for your services/product.

    Because it's a BUSINESS beholden to the government for so much, the government can enforce the business to abide by its laws.

    The Interstate Commerce Clause gets em every time.

    There is if you're a CHURCH not attempting to profit off performing marriages. If you're a public chapel who performs weddings of all kinds as a business with a business and tax id, there is legally no difference.

    If it's a for-profit business, they can encroach as far as they want. It's their money.
     
  13. Sapper Woody Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    175
    I think the reason that we are of differing opinions here, Carpro, is that I don't see them as marrying people in "Holy" matrimony. They are glorified justices of the peace. They are not ministers, performing a religious ceremony. They are offering a service, that they hypocritically try to refuse gays while serving fornicators and adulterers.

    So, I think it basically comes down to whether you see them as pastors performing a religious ceremony, or someone just offering a service. With the name "Hitching Post", I know what I think of them.
     
  14. carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Must have missed it in the story. Did it state neither one of them was an ordained minister?

    Either way...

    They don't refuse to marry gays. Their stated policy is to unite in marriage one man with one woman. If they are gay, so be it.

    How 'bout them roaches? Gonna put 'em the menu before I file a discrimination lawsuit against you?


    Hmmm..... Had to go back and read the story again. It states clearly that they are both ordained ministers.
     
  15. sag38 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,395
    Likes Received:
    2
    I would perform the ceremony but when I was finished with the sermon portion of the ceremony they, most likely, would have bolted out the door. Let's just say that they would have no doubt as to what the Bible says about their ungodly union. There is more than one way to skin a cat and be within the confines of the law when operating a business that is utilized by the general public.
     
  16. Zaac Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    222
    I couldn't help but laugh at the picture in my head. :laugh:
     
  17. Alcott Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Messages:
    9,404
    Likes Received:
    353
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And so is a delicatessen. I'm going to look for one and ask to buy a ham sandwich, and when they say they serve kosher only, I should able to sue them for religious discrimination... if the info given her about nondiscrimination in public accommodations is accurate.
     
  18. Sapper Woody Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    175
    This was a poor statement on my part. I didn't mean that they weren't ordained. I meant that they weren't ministering. They don't have a ministry. They have a business.
     
  19. Sapper Woody Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    175
    Refusing to have something on a menu, and refusing to serve a group of people are two different things. Carpro keeps bringing this up, too. I was ignoring it, though, as it's nonsense. But now two people are using the same straw man argument.

    It's not even close to the same. "I'll have chili" "Sorry, we don't serve chili" "Discrimination". Stupid argument.

    "I'll have chili" "Sorry, we don't serve gays." "Discrimination!" Now you have an argument.
     
  20. carpro Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    25,823
    Likes Received:
    1,167
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I don't know that we get to decide that. Do we know that they do not also counsel the people they marry on what God meant for a marriage to be?

    Getting paid to marry someone does not disqualify a person from performing a ministry. Most preachers receive an honorarium to marry even members of their on congregation.