Are progressives guilty of Christianphobia?

[Litzy]

I think Christianophobia may be too strong a word here (though there is an excellent book out there that discusses the valid problem on a global scale also called Christianophobia). I'm tempted to take the majority at the word they don't want to discriminate against Christians.

 

Our culture is becoming increasingly secular for good and for bad as well as the fact there is a liberal slant to our politics and social culture. Our society is looking for unity and acceptance for all (and I really do think that if you sat people down and asked them that specifically, they'd admit it). But as SoulSearcher was saying, we don't know the best way to go about it.

[Traveler]

So things are starting to get difficult for Christians?  Has the rapture taken place yet - Did I miss it?

[carlimac]

It would be nice if leaders of our country would take the high road and show the way. Demand mutual respect. Let the laws stand in Indiana and Arkansas and trust that most will use them truthfully. Sure there may be some who won't. But I think the "damage" done by the truly mean spirited bigots doesn't have to rise to anything at near what those who were really discriminated against (like lost their lives in big numbers) experienced. yes, some may be discriminated against in a way that seems unfair, but all they have to do is walk! away!  And find a different business who will serve them.  We are breaking our backs trying to make gays happy. They continue to find things to be unhappy about. why is that?

[prisonchaplain]

A line I read in a recent column:  We would never require a Jewish baker to make the hosts for a Catholic mass, so why do we insist a fundamentalist Christian one make a cake for a same-sex wedding?

[Guest]

A line I read in a recent column:  We would never require a Jewish baker to make the hosts for a Catholic mass, so why do we insist a fundamentalist Christian one make a cake for a same-sex wedding?

You do realize that these guys go to the fundamentalist one BECAUSE they're fundamentalist, right? The objectives are different here.

[slamjet]

Soulsearcher, FWIW, I think you have a lot of good in you.  Maybe the outward patience you learned in retail just makes it seem so.

 

Lest we forget, Soul beats his employees into submission

 

Soul, Long time no see!  Good to see you back.

[Guest]

Lest we forget, Soul beats his employees into submission

 

Soul, Long time no see!  Good to see you back.

And you to, my dear slamjet. You're like ninja now... comes around for a few and poof gone for a while then comes back for a few and poof gone again...

[Traveler]

A line I read in a recent column:  We would never require a Jewish baker to make the hosts for a Catholic mass, so why do we insist a fundamentalist Christian one make a cake for a same-sex wedding?

 

As you know I consider myself not just a Christian but a devout Christian.  I have been very vocal that I am devoutly against same sex marriage.  However, if I as asked to make a cake for a same sex wedding - I would first ask for their money for the cake.  Then after I received the money - I would say that although I am convinced same sex marriage is harmful to human society and a grave danger to the human species - but I will none-the-less make your cake as an act of kindness and also because I am impressed that you would ask me, as one that opposes such marriage - to bake your cake. 

 

I thank you for supporting my business and I want you to know I will in kind provide your cake realizing that you will support my business despite the fact that I do not support your marriage.  If they then asked for their money back - I would accuse them of bigotry and hate and anti to ask for their money back simply because we disagree about some things.

 

I think that many fundamental Christians are not wise in how they handle these things.

Edited April 2, 2015 by Traveler

[Suzie]

If I go to Olive Garden and the waiter tells me if I am aware of how many calories I am about to consume and starts giving me a speech about the unhealthiness of cheese and meat, and pasta sauce etc BUT she would put the order for me even though she doesn't agree with what *I* am about to consume, I would think he/she is nuts and needs help. I cannot see how baking/selling a cake for a gay couple equals supporting gay marriage!

 

Nobody wants to know your (general "your") opinion about gay marriage when someone goes to purchase something from you, nobody cares. Just bake the darn cake and get over it. My goodness.

Edited April 2, 2015 by Suzie

[prisonchaplain]

Suzie, you don't get the analogy?  Observant Jews believe Jesus to be a false prophet.  How can you ask one to bake sacramental bread for a Christ-worshipping ritual?  Likewise, fundamentalist Christians (and most others, and almost all LDS) believe that marriage is a sacrament, between a couple, their God and their church.  Why should they be asked to provide an element of a sacred rite, when they consider that rite to be profane and sacrilegious?

[Suzie]

Why should they be asked to provide an element of a sacred rite, when they consider that rite to be profane and sacrilegious?

 

I got the analogy. The example you provide with the Jews is interesting because you speak about baking sacramental bread for a Christ-worshipping ritual, a rite that renews covenants made at baptism for the LDS Church. We are talking about baking a cake here and the cake in question is not used as part of the rite itself. As a matter of fact, having the cake or not during a  wedding does not change the rite or affects it in any way because it is not part of the rite. In the example you provide, the bread is a fundamental part of the rite and used as part of the ritual. Hence, the comparison in my view is nonsensical.

[Litzy]

I'm with Suzie here. There would be a better leg to stand upon if we had random groups trying to force their way into people's religious practices.

 

But, by and large, I think we have consumers simply looking to purchase goods and services. The whole "we reserve the right to refuse service..." does not seem to have all that much legal power. We either need to make that a much stronger policy or get rid of it altogether.

[Guest]

I'm not with Suzie here.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my personalized t-shirt company refuse to make t-shirt for this guy who wants me to print "Christians are <insert the vilest thing you can think of that starts with the letter m and has ucker in the end>" on it.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my Janitorial service company refuse to clean a pornhouse.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my Your-Way-Right-Away-Restaurant refuse to serve your fraternity who is shoveling my food down a fat tube to a dude's throat in a hazing ceremony.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my custom-blade-making company refuse to make blades for your roosters that are going to be used in a street-cockfighting-gig.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my medical practice refuse to abort your kid.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my pancake business refuse to make pancakes for the guy who raped my neighbor's daughter.

You want a pancake - there's 2 more pancake houses down the road. This is AMERICA for crying out loud.

There is NOTHING WRONG with this picture:

Edited April 2, 2015 by anatess

[mordorbund]

Very clever.... I see you are trying to threadjack a gay marriage thread into an immigration thread. I like where this is going :)

 

 

There is NOTHING WRONG with this picture:

[prisonchaplain]

I got the analogy. The example you provide with the Jews is interesting because you speak about baking sacramental bread for a Christ-worshipping ritual, a rite that renews covenants made at baptism for the LDS Church. We are talking about baking a cake here and the cake in question is not used as part of the rite itself. As a matter of fact, having the cake or not during a  wedding does not change the rite or affects it in any way because it is not part of the rite. In the example you provide, the bread is a fundamental part of the rite and used as part of the ritual. Hence, the comparison in my view is nonsensical.

 

Nonsensical?  Traveler says he'd bake the cake and give them a testimony of how wrong gay marriage is.  Others, perhaps like you, would just bake the cake, take the money, and tithe on the profit.  Still others have what the courts call, "a sincere religious motivation" not to participate in a religious sacrament they consider profane and sacrilegious.  The fact that in the latter case the cake is not fundamental to the observance matters not.  If I truly believe that having my vocational gift, which I believe God gave me, on display at an event I consider a perversion of the sacred, what is the State's compelling interest in forcing me to do so? 

 

It could even be argued that the non-essential nature of the cake make the government compulsion nonsensical. 

[Litzy]

I'm not with Suzie here.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my personalized t-shirt company refuse to make t-shirt for this guy who wants me to print "Christians are <insert the vilest thing you can think of that starts with the letter m and has ucker in the end>" on it.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my Janitorial service company refuse to clean a pornhouse.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my Your-Way-Right-Away-Restaurant refuse to serve your fraternity who is shoveling my food down a fat tube to a dude's throat in a hazing ceremony.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my custom-blade-making company refuse to make blades for your roosters that are going to be used in a street-cockfighting-gig.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my medical practice refuse to abort your kid.

I reserve the right to not be sued if my pancake business refuse to make pancakes for the guy who raped my neighbor's daughter.

You want a pancake - there's 2 more pancake houses down the road. This is AMERICA for crying out loud.

There is NOTHING WRONG with this picture:

 

You list some things that certainly should be protected and most of those things are already protected one way or another.

 

And I'm in favor of "We have the right to refuse service" rights, I really am. But the rights the claim they need to be a lot stronger.

[Backroads]

My issue is that it seems these people are taking their requests for goods/services to places they know will balk. Asking for trouble. Not cool.

It's all well and good to expect not to be picked on, but we all ought to be big boys and girls and learn to handle rejection.

[Guest]

Very clever.... I see you are trying to threadjack a gay marriage thread into an immigration thread. I like where this is going :)

You caught it! I BOW TO YOU OH WISE ONE!

[Blackmarch]

I thought this article summed it up pretty well;
http://news.yahoo.com/mom-pops-forgo-gay-weddings-destroyed-104600038.html

[slamjet]

And you to, my dear slamjet. You're like ninja now... comes around for a few and poof gone for a while then comes back for a few and poof gone again...

 

It's called hit and run, I'm practicing. 

 

Naw, work, school, callings, they're pulling me in all different directions.

[unixknight]

 

Edit:  It seems sometimes this image doesn't display right.  Here's a link to the original page:

 

http://liberallogic101.com/?p=23828

 

Just sayin'

Edited April 9, 2015 by unixknight

[Traveler]

Nonsensical?  Traveler says he'd bake the cake and give them a testimony of how wrong gay marriage is.  Others, perhaps like you, would just bake the cake, take the money, and tithe on the profit.  Still others have what the courts call, "a sincere religious motivation" not to participate in a religious sacrament they consider profane and sacrilegious.  The fact that in the latter case the cake is not fundamental to the observance matters not.  If I truly believe that having my vocational gift, which I believe God gave me, on display at an event I consider a perversion of the sacred, what is the State's compelling interest in forcing me to do so? 

 

It could even be argued that the non-essential nature of the cake make the government compulsion nonsensical. 

 

Nonsensical?  Traveler says he'd bake the cake and give them a testimony of how wrong gay marriage is.  Others, perhaps like you, would just bake the cake, take the money, and tithe on the profit.  Still others have what the courts call, "a sincere religious motivation" not to participate in a religious sacrament they consider profane and sacrilegious.  The fact that in the latter case the cake is not fundamental to the observance matters not.  If I truly believe that having my vocational gift, which I believe God gave me, on display at an event I consider a perversion of the sacred, what is the State's compelling interest in forcing me to do so? 

 

It could even be argued that the non-essential nature of the cake make the government compulsion nonsensical. 

 

My point is that if someone is in the business of baking cakes for people then bake cakes for people - what they use the cake for is for them to decide.  G-d created for us our bodies - how we use our bodies is up to us.  Are we greater judge than G-d?

 

If someone wants to tell us their are marring someone of the same sex - we have an opportunity to tell them our opinion about SSM.  I am saying if we serve others in our business by making cakes - then make the cake and let them decide if they want to support my business or not.  Let them be the respecter of persons and to be the bigot.

 

I can understand a Christian not going in search of gay couples for their business - but if they want to have a business that deals with the public - then as Christians they should deal with the public. 

[Guest]

My point is that if someone is in the business of baking cakes for people then bake cakes for people - what they use the cake for is for them to decide.  G-d created for us our bodies - how we use our bodies is up to us.  Are we greater judge than G-d?

 

If someone wants to tell us their are marring someone of the same sex - we have an opportunity to tell them our opinion about SSM.  I am saying if we serve others in our business by making cakes - then make the cake and let them decide if they want to support my business or not.  Let them be the respecter of persons and to be the bigot.

 

I can understand a Christian not going in search of gay couples for their business - but if they want to have a business that deals with the public - then as Christians they should deal with the public.

I don't agree with this.

My business is an extension of me. It defines who I am and how I practice my faith. Say I'm Catholic and own a pub. My business is selling alcohol to anybody that wants it. But even then, I'm not going to sell alcohol to an alcoholic. Say, I have no interest in religion and I sell Anne Geddes pictures. My business is selling whimsical photos of children. But even then, I'm not going to sell these photos to someone I know who has a history of child porn.

Sure, I'm not gonna have a problem with somebody else selling alcohol to an alcoholic nor selling Anne Geddes pictures to one with child porn history. But, I, personally, will not on principle.

Baking cakes kinda go in that same flavor. There are many many many opportunities to teach. I can pass on this one.

Edited April 9, 2015 by anatess

[Vort]

Progressives aren't.

[Capitalist_Oinker]

Addressing the title of the thread for a minute, I propose that progressives (generally) don't necessarily "fear" Christianity, but rather "hate" it. 

 

And why do they hate it?

Because government is their God and they are loath to sanction the worship of any other.