[TheRealVille]

How about these other abominations? Are they ok reasons to keep patrons out if you know the patron does any of them?

Proverbs 17:15 - He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both [are] abomination to the LORD.

Deuteronomy 22:5 - The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so [are] abomination unto the LORD thy God.

Proverbs 12:22 - Lying lips [are] abomination to the LORD: but they that deal truly [are] his delight.

Proverbs 11:20 - They that are of a froward heart [are] abomination to the LORD: but [such as are] upright in [their] way [are] his delight.

Proverbs 15:8 - The sacrifice of the wicked [is] an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright [is] his delight.

Proverbs 20:10 - Divers weights, [and] divers measures, both of them [are] alike abomination to the LORD.

Proverbs 15:26 - The thoughts of the wicked [are] an abomination to the LORD: but [the words] of the pure [are] pleasant words.

1 John 2:4 - He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

Proverbs 16:5 - Every one [that is] proud in heart [is] an abomination to the LORD: [though] hand [join] in hand, he shall not be unpunished.

Proverbs 28:9 - He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer [shall be] abomination.

Proverbs 15:9 - The way of the wicked [is] an abomination unto the LORD: but he loveth him that followeth after righteousness.




[/B]

[TheRealThing]

They are right there in the verse I quoted. The bolded ones don't deal withnsexuvl perversion. The point about Lot is that god is ok with him turning his daughters over to be raped, as long as he saves the men from being raped?


Behold, this was the [B]guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.[/B]



So, back to the point. Is homosexuality the only sin you are comfortable with restaurant owners discriminating against patrons. Would gluttony be a good reason for an owner not wanting to contribute to the patrons sin for religious reasons? Are the other abominations good reasons for an owner to be able to discriminate?

Decided to crop that bolded quote to drop the bothersome abomination word out huh? Anytime God calls a people Sodom, or calls them sister Sodom, they are headed for the fires of Hell. God destroyed Sodom with fire for sexual sins. And this is just a reference to that while pointing out that those He is addressing can expect the same one day. The restaurant owners of Walkerton did not discriminate against anybody. They never denied anybody service, their only trespass was to answer a hypothetical question. But, just like you or anybody else would not rationally force a Muslim tee shirt shop to make a shirt captioned "Jesus is Lord", which He is BTW, forcing the Christian owner of a pizza shop to cater a gay wedding is equally ridiculous.

[TheRealThing]

How about these other abominations? Are they ok reasons to keep patrons out if you know the patron does any of them?

Again, no patrons were kept out. And the fact that there are other sins that God considers abominable (which I have already pointed out BTW) does not mitigate the fact that you totally mischaracterized the Biblical account of Sodom and Gomorrah. Let's see, how did that go again? "According to the book, Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for a lot more reasons than homosexuality."

You can't back that up and I called you out for it. So, you can post the entire Old Testament if you like, but you were still wrong.

[TheRealVille]

^The text about other sins of Sodom are plainly in the text. If you choose to ignore it, that's on you. Anybody that has reading comprehension can see that sexual perversions were not the only reason he destroyed it, according to the book. You can't make up your own opinion of the text and cherry pick what suits your needs. When you take the text in context, and not cherry pick, you can see that sodom was destroyed because of multiple sins against god.

[TheRealThing]

^The text about other sins of Sodom are plainly in the text. If you choose to ignore it, that's on you. Anybody that has reading comprehension can see that sexual perversions were not the only reason he destroyed it, according to the book. You can't make up your own opinion of the text and cherry pick what suits your needs. When you take the text in context, and not cherry pick, you can see that sodom was destroyed because of multiple sins against god.

It's plain and in the book, you just can't point it out huh? Okay then. I'm gonna claim my own high ground here for a change and declare context has been established clearly in Chapters 18 and 19 of Genesis.

BTW, thanks so much for posting Deuteronomy 22:5 (KJV)
5 "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God."

I really enjoyed reading it and frankly your post brought it back to memory. It is clear in reading the verse that distinct lines have been drawn by our Creator with which to strictly separate and identify the sexes. I mean, even the clothing is not to be shared. Kind of puts a bad light on the gender bending aspects of the LGBT community does it not?

God will not tolerate the sin of homosexuality. It is the only sin for which He will turn the offender over to a reprobate mind.
Romans 1:26-28 (KJV)
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Now you can call all the above cherry picking if you like, it is none the less God's opinion on the matter. And FTR, once He gives anyone over to a reprobate mind, any chance of salvation is gone.

[Harry Rex Vonner]

^The text about other sins of Sodom are plainly in the text. If you choose to ignore it, that's on you. Anybody that has reading comprehension can see that sexual perversions were not the only reason he destroyed it, according to the book. You can't make up your own opinion of the text and cherry pick what suits your needs. When you take the text in context, and not cherry pick, you can see that sodom was destroyed because of multiple sins against god.

As a business owner, I'll serve whomever I please. I will refrain from serving whomever I please. I would not provide services to a fairy if the services were "fairy related" as it is in regard to baking a wedding cake for this abhorrent "ceremony". If the government or others disagree with my position on this issue, they can all go to hell.

[TheRealThing]

As a business owner, I'll serve whomever I please. I will refrain from serving whomever I please. I would not provide services to a fairy if the services were "fairy related" as it is in regard to baking a wedding cake for this abhorrent "ceremony". If the government or others disagree with my position on this issue, they can all go to hell.

I would just like to point something out here. Back in December of 2010 we saw that the last gasp of the Democratically controlled Congress was to repeal DADT.

Consider the change in climate of the United States since that day. In what has been basically a four year period, we have gone from business as usual to a state of fear and sometimes chaos. You will recall the argument used to bring us to the sad place in which we find ourselves today; it went that we ought not deny brave though gay soldiers, the respect they deserve as a reward for their sacrificial service to this country. Well, since Dec 2010 something has been baking in the social oven, and it sure doesn't seem much like cake to me.

Events like those in Walkerton are what I have foreseen in the US' unfortunate transformation via the legislative branch, in this case the repeal of DADT in particular. Remember, this was sold as affecting the US military only. Ironically, militant enforcement of issues of tolerance will henceforth burden existence in the land of the free. Elections have consequences and even the freeloaders will rue the day America's highest elected officials superseded God's law by making homosexuality legal, and it's adherents a protected class. And it all changed in a relative blink of our country's eye, with two more years to come before the elections at that.

[WideRight05]

Another call to action - be sure to send the message out about the Marriage and Religious Freedom Act. This would prohibit the federal government from discriminating against individuals, organizations, and small business owners who believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and penalizing them because of their beliefs.

If you don't believe this is a problem, think of how the fire chief in Atlanta, GA lost his job because of writing a book with two small parts labeling homosexuality as a sin. Think about Brandon Eich, who donated $1,000 to support Proposition 8 and protect traditional marriage at the time - who lost his job with Mozilla Firefox as the CEO because he held the same position on marriage that Barack Obama did in 2008.

https://www.votervoice.net/FRCA/Campaigns/39973/Respond

It's simple to send this message out (it's a respectful message and is even pre-typed for your convenience!), and it's a call to action. Even though our state senators and representatives would cast a vote for this bill, they probably aren't going to be pushing it hard at this point.

We can sit here and do nothing, or we can take action. I encourage you to take action.

[WideRight05]

I'm not a big fan of posting a lot of articles, but I feel this one sums up the RFRA quite well.

http://cnsnews.com/commentary/ed-feulner...us-freedom