Viviane

Joined

• started 16 topics
• posted 4,484 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Viviane

• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  DJS, some people have convictions that aren't up for sale--it is rare nowadays, but there still are some.

  Yes, they are. That's exactly the point. They will bake a gay or make a flower arrangement for gay couples or fornicators, both "sins" according to the Bible and then suddenly decide that a specific instance is wrong and next time it's OK.

  That's very definition of hypocrisy and convictions up for sales.

  Some people have convictions, and others blow as the wind blows, and sell their soul for a buck.

  Sorry, unless you follow the Bible 100% (since you claim to be a Christian) you are picking and choosing your morals and convictions are you go.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  I will adress one aspect about the Bakery case. In this instance they would have their hand specifically in the event, also not to forget the photographers who have been sued for not filming a gay wedding.

  Yes, because that's the service they went into business to offer. It's not being part of the ceremony. Most custom cakes ARE for an event and that's the service they decided to offer. Same with the photographer.

  There is a difference in baking a cake and selling it to someone or refusing to sell, and making a specific cake with a specific message on the cake (whether it be 2 female cake toppers or 2 male. or congratulations Lisa and Maureen) the difference is one selling a good, where the other is more like catering to a service.

  What is the difference? They are making wedding cakes. What is the difference between making a custom cake and making a custom cake and delivering it that it suddenly becomes morally offensive? How is it OK to provide a cake for fornicators but not gay people? Both are sins.

  I could not in any way shape or form be a partaker in anything that promotes the WT Society.

  The last two companies I worked for had the WTBS as customers. I had no problem with it and found it deliciously ironic that the sales to them helped fund my apostate lifestyle.

  For as ever much how wrong I believe the Watchtower is--there are just as many people who believe that gay marriage is just as wrong and don't want any part of it.

  So?
• 
  13

  Scripture Challenge: Theists, atheist, anti-theists, absentheists, satan worshippers whoever can help...

  by freemindfade in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  can anyone give me one or more scriptures in the first 5 books of the bible that would describe yhwh the tribal desert god as loving, kind, merciful, etc?...

  and by loving i don't mean, "in order to release all the jews from slavery god @$$blasted the egyptians with ten plagues because he was so loving to his chosen race"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  "And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed..."

  Including the poisonous ones so... not so much.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  I think much more more about my country that is being forced away from its traditional roots, while the people that promote this are using deceitful tactics. I spoke out about the way the watchtower forced deception on people, and I also speak out how these liberal groups are also using similar tactics.

  Ah, so women not being able to own property, religious tests for office and slavery are what we should pine for?

  What specific deceitful tactics are you speaking of? Most people seem to be very clear on what is going on. I keep hearing about this gay agenda and tactics and freedom cause Jesus and how much these religious white people think about gay sex, but I can't seem to find what the deceitful tactics are, certainly not ones like the WT uses.

  Could you elaborate? Also explain why businesses owned by Christians specifically need protection? You also ignored my question about if it would be OK if the gay couple getting married were celibate. You also didn't address the line of right and wrong and the 1 drop rule.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  The intent of the law was to protect christian oriented businesses from having to participate in a ceremony they want no part of--the problem was, the law as it was written, was just a blanket check for people to discriminate in non-essential things--even people who don't have sincere religious beliefs.

  But they aren't participating in a ceremony, they are providing a service that they went into business to provide. If they don't want to do that service, don't open a business offering that service.

  And why in the world should should a business owned by Christians get any protections? We've still not answered that fundamental question.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  Actually DJS, I have went undercover in several gay agenda oriented organizations, just to see the inner workings, which explains my long time absence from here.

  "On the down low" isn't the same as "undercover", BTW.

  It seems as if you spend more time thinking about gay men having sex than they do.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  Viviane, you ask where to draw the line--I think that was the problem with this law in the first place, it didn't draw the line. It never specified acts vs.people, and it should have had some language in it that prohibited actual discrimination against people vs. ( what they do)

  So, what if two gay people get married BUT decide to be celibate? Non-gay people do it, would that be something that it's OK to discriminate against? Being gay isn't "something they do", so I am assuming it's the sex act itself is the problem.

  Why is it OK to make a cake for a special night for two gay people but not for a wedding?

  It should have specifically mentioned the wedding industry and cake bakers and florists--it also should have stated that people could not be discriminated against in buying gas, getting healthcare, etc etc--the important.

  Why? Why would you force a banker to violate their conscience but not a baker? Why do you think the government should be picking winners and losers?

  I agree with the intent of the law, but disagree with how it was implemented

  What, specifically, do you think the intent was?

  -in other words there were no protections for real discrimination, which meant that people who aren't even religious could discriminate--you know the secular ones.

  Well, yes, because thankfully you can pass laws based on "because Jesus", so you have to hide the bigotry in terms like "sincerely held belief" which means the bigot Christians get to experience the law of unintended consequences.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  Anyway Viviane to answer your question, yes I would probably be mad, however I would still be thankful to live in a country where people aren't compelled to think all alike

  Sorry, but, "serving your customers" doesn't mean "think alike". I mean, let's assume you are gay and I run a vegetable stand. Are you saying I should be able to use police, fire and public health protections, accept tax breaks (all things paid for by gay people, BTW) and decide not to sell you and your boyfriend (who I am just imagine as Danny DeVito, for arguments sake) carrots and zucchini because of what I think you might decide to do with them?

  Where do you draw the line? Where do you say "this is wrong"? You've already mentioned that basing discrimination on skin color is wrong, but what if someone thinks the old southern "1 drop" rule is what should be applied? Why does your chosen religion (and complete misunderstanding and selective application of that religion) mean you get to skate on providing service that you, as a person who is going to use public service and signed a public contract agreeing to serve the public can decide to break?

  Why is the utter hypocrisy of serving fornicators and adulterers and gay people and taking their money fine until if for a specific ceremony not mentioned in the Bible?

  But then again, what do I know?

  Clearly we're all asking that.

  The only time I have been discriminated against for potential gayness, was by a closeted (but self affirming, married, gay colleague), simply because I wasn't potentially gay enough--enough to sleep with him!

  Riiiiiiight.....
• 
  284

  I'm an ABSENTHEIST. Are you also?

  by EdenOne in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it just dawned on me.

  the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.

  so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  ^^^that ^^^

  Ah, so absentheism is still saying nothing. Got it.
• 
  274

  Indiana "Religious Freedom" (right to discriminate)

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  sickening 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!"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Viviane

  Everything you say will come true, because the bible says it will. God said, in the end he would cut the days short, for even the very elect would be deceived.

  The Bible says God will end the world because you are potentially gay and might need a gay wedding cake one day?

  Wow, that's very specific.