And yes, much of it is a choice! The problem is the gay agenda (much like the Society) is very shrewd in keeping things covered up. They allow NO dissent whatsoever. They preach tolerance, but only when it favors their position.
Junction-Guy
JoinedPosts by Junction-Guy
-
274
Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)
by Simon insickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
-
-
-
274
Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)
by Simon insickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
-
-
Junction-Guy
Actually they were doing them a favor--the fact that they served them graciously was favor enough. The law doesn't say you have to be nice when dealing with customers. But either way, this couple did what was best for the agenda--they cried "victim" and sued. The squeaky wheel gets the grease! -
274
Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)
by Simon insickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
-
-
Junction-Guy
I don't see this as a civil rights issue, more like a moral wrong issue. The only real hate in this situation is what was exhibited by the gay couple demanding this Baker cater a function that totally goes against his conscience. -
274
Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)
by Simon insickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
-
-
Junction-Guy
2 totally different issues. One involves simple race, and the other involves action. If the Baker had refused to serve gay people, then it would be a closed case, but this Baker did not refuse to serve the people, it has already been proven that they were served graciously all along, however they did not want to be a part of a ceremony that went totally against their moral conscience. That is the difference. -
274
Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)
by Simon insickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
-
-
Junction-Guy
you can call me wrong all you want, but that doesn't change the actual issue that this case is about. -
274
Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)
by Simon insickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
-
-
Junction-Guy
One small, but very vocal sector of society is causing all this ruckus. It is one thing to to ensure equal treatment of people, but to elevate one segment of society to an untouchable class is totally agregious.
If a muslim bakery refused to cater a wedding of another muslim to an "infidel" do you think they would be sued? doubt it!
If a JW baker refused to cater a gay wedding would they be sued? doubt it!
The only people who are sued are born again bible believing christians.
The issue at stake in the cake bakery is not the fact that they refused to serve gays, it is they refused to participate in a service that goes against their moral conscience. There are some businesses (fewer nowadays) that aren't willing to sacrifice their convictions for a quick buck, and this baker was one of them.
-
26
What did you become after leaving Jehovah's Witnesses?
by Garrett inhey guys,.
so, since my leaving i have been doing so much research on so many topics that it's been extremely enlightening.
not only have i learned a lot about the organization and what motivates it, but i have also learned a lot about the bible, god and most importantly, myself.. currently, i'm not quite sure where i stand, but i'm having some real issues with the bible and god.
-
-
Junction-Guy
A dyed in the wool Baptist -
9
Canada's MACLEANS article "Against their will: Inside Canada’s forced marriages." The main subject in the story is an XJW we all know.
by AndersonsInfo inhttp://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/against-their-will/.
forced marriage is one of the last taboos to break.
a new law could make it a crime.
-
-
Junction-Guy
While this is bad that it happened, it is definitely not a Watchtower sanctioned practice. Sounds more like an overzealous mother trying to play matchmaker with her daughter. For every one of these instances, there are probably 100 watchtower articles discouraging marriage. The WT is more likely to prohibit marriage then force it.
-
21
Looking for others that maybe gay or questioning
by dewey79 inso i am the weird case that i still believe in the jehovah's organization.
there are a couple of things that stop me from going.
is there anyone else out there that still believes?
-
-
Junction-Guy
So let me get this straight---You still believe in pretty much everything the organization teaches. You are Ok with forbidding people to celebrate Christmas, foregoing a college education, isolating children during their childhood, prohibiting blood transfusions, prohibiting birthdays, prohibiting voting, etc etc etc. none of these things the bible specifically prohibits.
Yet the one thing spelled out in black and white in the bible that it actually does prohibit, homosexuality--you are OK with that, and even use similiar reasoning techniques that the watchtower uses in the above instances to come to your conclusion?
Of all the the things you would have reason to go against the organization for, the only one you choose to disagree with them on is the only thing the bible specifically condemns. I am so thankful I am out of that cult, Thank God!
I would love to have you try to witness to me at one of those trolley carts!
-
24
Do You Consider Jehovah's Witnesses A Boring Group of People???
by minimus ini think they are the most boring people on earth.
they are about as exciting as a dead ant..
-
-
Junction-Guy
The people themselves aren't boring, but the religion is the most boring, dried up religion on the face of the earth.