"Religious Freedom" = Discrimination = Hate

Author: 3RU7AL

Posts

Total: 737
Topic's author
#1
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
Mississippi’s so-called “religious freedom” law went into effect today, opening up the LGBTQ community to widespread discrimination.

HB 1523 allows anyone citing a religiously motivated reason to deny goods and services to the LGBTQ community, as well as those who have sex outside of marriage, or anything else that might rub their dogmatic sensibilities the wrong way.

It comes on the heels of Attorney General Jeff Sessions issuing guidance memos on behalf of the Trump administration to steer the Justice Department in a similar direction, giving wide protections to those who discriminate in the name of their religious beliefs. [LINK]

Does anyone know what part of "The Bible" makes denial of service to sinners mandatory?

I know it says "gay = bad" in a few places, but it also says "divorce = bad" and "shellfish = bad" and "picking up sticks on a Saturday = bad".
#2
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
The Bible, at least to my knowledge, does not say "gay = bad"


Does anyone know what part of "The Bible" makes denial of service to sinners mandatory?
I don't know about this either.
#3
WisdomofAges
WisdomofAges's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 354
0
1
3
WisdomofAges's avatar
WisdomofAges
0
1
3
-->
@3RU7AL
.......New WORLD News.........every since the elimination of the Abrahamic GODS to Comic Book Mythology in 2022 the Middle East has had 
an unprecedented surge in new infrastructure and cooperation among the up and coming generations....never before has there been such
unity and harmony among the people of this region where some of earliest and advanced cultures flourished 6 - 8 thousand years ago...

More excitement is building as researchers are discovering more and more amazing artifacts and information on these amazing ancient 
civilizations...

As the older generations DIE off and take their horrifically OBSOLETE and OPPRESSIVE Comic Book GODS and DOGMA
to the grave with them... a revitalization of the region has occurred in place of the CONFLICT - FEAR - VIOLENCE....which
dominated the region for 5000 years...

These are truly EPIC TIMES as all of HUMANITY has trashed the Abrahamic GOD construct for POWER and CONTROL of the MINDS 
and LIVES of BILLIONS....now that humanity is FREE from the parasite VAMPIRE bondage founded by the defunct Roman Catholic Church
and the MUSLIM Allah God garbage....it's like a perpetual spring time all over the planet...

Live WELL - LONG and PROSPER is the new MANTRA of humanity....a true breath of fresh air now that the HELL on EARTH Abrahamic
JEW - JESUS - ALLAH GOD are meaningless Mythology and Comic Books for entertainment only...

Topic's author
#4
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Snoopy
The Bible, at least to my knowledge, does not say "gay = bad"

Does anyone know what part of "The Bible" makes denial of service to sinners mandatory?
I don't know about this either.
Would it be fair to say that you believe any Christian denying medical treatment or home repairs or groceries to someone because they look like a homo would be immoral?
#5
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
Maybe under some unusual special circumstances it is possible, but I don't see how one would gracefully arrive at such a conclusion, especially if it is unlawful. By your plain meaning, that is a fair assessment.
#6
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@3RU7AL
If a gay person doesn't receive service, they can go to another store to get the service they want.  Not all businesses will refuse to serve gay people.
#7
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@Alec
of course you are correct, but this is an anti religion argument and an authoritarian way of making people do what they don't want to do.  These are the same people who make the argument that people have the right to choose over their own body, but apparently that choice is only limited to killing things, not labor, property they own or services they offer.
I find it hypocritical that they want autonomy and choice over what they do with their own bodies but would force people to use their bodies to labor and provide services to those they have religious objections to.  Funny how that works.
#8
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL

Does anyone know what part of "The Bible" makes denial of service to sinners mandatory?

I know it says "gay = bad" in a few places, but it also says "divorce = bad" and "shellfish = bad" and "picking up sticks on a Saturday = bad".

We need protection for religious freedom. Religious freedom goes hand in hand with anti-discrimination. Removing one of these violates the Constitution.
#9
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@Alec
If a gay person doesn't receive service, they can go to another store to get the service they want.  Not all businesses will refuse to serve gay people.

Don't be ridiculous.  You can't say that every community in America has a majority of reasonable businesses catering to the public in every sector.  Congress still needs to address this issue, adding something to the effect of "sexual orientation" to the civil rights act.
Topic's author
#10
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Alec
If a gay person doesn't receive service, they can go to another store to get the service they want.  Not all businesses will refuse to serve gay people.
The same could be said for any minority.  Just go somewhere else...

Git outa my town!!!

What Would Jesus Do?
#11
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Snoopy
 You can't say that every community in America has a majority of reasonable businesses catering to the public in every sector.
If there are 20 businesses for a certain product, about 12 of them would be pro-gay.  A gay person can simply go towards one of these businesses for trade.
#12
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@Alec
Well, I probably shouldn't argue the rationale of the civil rights act in this setting.
#13
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@3RU7AL
The same could be said for any minority.
Not every minority.  The bible is fine with some minorities, like immigrants.  But not gays.  The bible says they won't go to heaven.  I don't agree with this; I'm not religious, but the bible is the bible.

What Would Jesus Do?
He would encourage conversion therapy so the gay people can do God's will and be straight.  
#14
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@Alec
.The bible is fine with some minorities, like immigrants.  But not gays.  The bible says they won't go to heaven. 
No, it doesn't, and if it did, that would be irrelevant to the topic at hand because humanity exists in a fallen state and we are all born into sin.  Salvation is possible by the Grace of God through Jesus Christ.

#15
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
Would it be fair to say that you believe any Christian denying medical treatment or home repairs or groceries to someone because they look like a homo would be immoral?
Not addressed to me of course, but yes, this would be immoral. But this is not what these laws are promoting. The problem that some people are having with these laws is what they speculate may happen. A business refuses to design a product for a gay marriage may lead to a gay person being denied medical treatment because he/she is gay. The challenge is sincere religious belief can mean anything. So if a doctor sincerely believes he should avoid treating a gay person on religious grounds, the lawmakers will honor it. But this is why we have judges. If this was a black and white issue, we wouldn't need judges.

These laws center around incidences where business owners did not refuse service based on the customer's sexual preference. in each case it was about refusing to design something supporting a form of marriage they disagree with for religious reasons. The lawmakers, who are not dealing with these issues from the comfort of an internet forum, had to deal with business owners who showed no sign of hatred, bigotry, vindictiveness, etc. In each case it was made clear they wouldn't refuse service to a gay person or couple except when it involves designing a product celebrating a same-sex union.

In spite of this, there's a constant perpetual accusation made concerning discrimination.The word discrimination is thrown out indiscriminately. So yes, laws protecting religious freedom are definitely necessary.





#16
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
It seems very clear that this bill is aimed at protecting religious organizations, and marriage is very much something we consider sacred, at least in Orthodox Christianity. In fact, marriage is considered a sacred mystery.


And yes, it would be an abomination to perform a homosexual "marriage" in the sanctuary of an Orthodox.


I certainly see it as a right of a business owner to be able to refuse service to anyone, and deal with the consequences of those decisions.





#17
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@3RU7AL
If it is immoral to force a christian to offer goods and services to the lbgtq community then it is immoral to force muslims, buhdists and/or atheists to offer goods and services to the christian community. 

If it is immoral to refuse services to christians based on religious disagreeance then it is immoral to refuse services to the lgbtq community based on religious disagreeance.
#18
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@secularmerlin

Mississippi’s so-called “religious freedom” law went into effect today, opening up the LGBTQ community to widespread discrimination.

HB 1523 allows anyone citing a religiously motivated reason to deny goods and services to the LGBTQ community, as well as those who have sex outside of marriage, or anything else that might rub their dogmatic sensibilities the wrong way.

The bill could be mischaracterized in the OP, at least according to what I have read through section two, where it formalizes a list of well known religious beliefs.  I haven't had time to seriously look through it yet for any flaws.
Topic's author
#19
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Alec
If there are 20 businesses for a certain product, about 12 of them would be pro-[black].  A [black] person can simply go towards one of these businesses for trade.
The question is, what is the "Biblical" teaching that makes denial of service mandatory?
Topic's author
#20
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@secularmerlin
If it is immoral to force a christian to offer goods and services to the lbgtq community then it is immoral to force muslims, buhdists and/or atheists to offer goods and services to the christian community. 

If it is immoral to refuse services to christians based on religious disagreeance then it is immoral to refuse services to the lgbtq community based on religious disagreeance.
Well stated.
#21
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
The question is, what is the "Biblical" teaching that makes denial of service mandatory? 

I wouldn't say that anything is mandatory in Christianity.  I would say what we have here is a matter of conscience.

#22
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Snoopy
I wouldn't say that anything is mandatory in Christianity.  What we have here is a matter of conscience.
I fail to see how discrimination is ever conscionable.

#23
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@secularmerlin
Example - Only upon being proven guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt with fair trial, should someone go to prison.
#24
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Snoopy
So long as this axiom applies equally to everyone I fail to see what your example has to do with discrimination.
#25
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@secularmerlin
You are speaking as though discrimination is limited to discrimination on the basis of identity.  Discrimination is a necessary aspect of life.

Discrimination: recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.

By the way, we could easily make up classes and say that it disproportionately effects those identities.
#26
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Snoopy
Innocent until proven guilty is something that should be applied EQUALLY to everyone. This would be EQUALITY which is the diametric opposite of discrimination. 
If you see a logical flaw in my reasoning please point it out specifically otherwise you will need to provide an example that is actually an example of discrimination.

#27
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@secularmerlin
The law only brings those proven guilty to justice, which is discriminatory.  The equality in process is besides the point of discrimination.  I am not sure how you consider that to be of relevance.
#28
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@3RU7AL
The question is, what is the "Biblical" teaching that makes denial of service mandatory? 
God says to live like he would.  God doesn't allow gays in heaven.  Therefore, religious people should have the right to emulate God on minor things like this.
Topic's author
#29
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Snoopy
The bill appears to be mischaracterized in the OP, at least from what I have read through section two, where it formalizes a list of well known religious beliefs.
This is just one example.

There are at least 20 versions of this in different states.

But the political context has changed drastically since then, and many social conservatives are now championing religious freedom bills as a way to protect them from having to provide service to LGBT people. Critics worry that states will use such laws to combat existing non-discrimination measures in court, providing legal cover for stores that refuse to serve gay customers or businesses to fire LGBT employees. [LINK]
#30
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
Is a free lance web designer at liberty to turn down a commission from, say, a KKK lodge?

I think discriminating against gays is ridiculous, discriminating against fascists and racists is laudable.  But I have to accept other people will see things diferently.  I think individiuals and 'private' businesses (which are effectively individuals) should be allowed to follow their conscience.   Large, public companies should not, imo, have the same privilege.  The dividing line might be based on, say, annual turnovern or number of shareholders.

If gay couples can't get anyone anywhere to design their cake, then the situation must be far more serious for gays in society generally, not just restricted to gettin their wedding cakes decorated.