Arizona religious freedom bill riles LGBT right supporters - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Nasal_Spray;43998329]Good luck walking the streets in your country and making it home alive with said t-shirt. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Sociopath/trolling" - dai))[/highlight][/QUOTE] thank you Dai [t]http://www.facepunch.com/fp/ratings/heart.png[/t]

[QUOTE=Tmaxx;43998761]"We see a growing hostility toward religion," said Josh Kredit, legal counsel for the group. wow gee i fucking wonder why[/QUOTE] White American chrisitans are the most persecuted group in the world right now when will they catch a break?

[QUOTE=Alan Ninja!;43998483]Lmao systematic oppression? Seriously? Yeah okay this law hurts some people's feelings and one or two gay people might be turned away from some small-time stores, I don't think that really qualifies as being [i]oppressed[/i][/QUOTE] were blacks being oppressed when they weren't allowed to eat at the same tables as white people?

[QUOTE=ZakkShock;43998769]thank you Dai [t]http://www.facepunch.com/fp/ratings/heart.png[/t][/QUOTE] eagerly awaiting "you can't ban me for my opinion/it was a joke/I'm being oppressed" response

Help help I'm being repressed

[QUOTE=Noah Gibbs;43998357]I just want to point out mormons are not anti-gay. There are old rules that don't allow you to be gay and a member of the church, but we openly accept gay people as complete equals. Plus I see these old rules to be changed in the next 20 years.[/QUOTE] i didn't imply they were, but i don't think arizona is mormon land regardless

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;43998706][i]Call him a racist, that argument never fails[/i][/QUOTE] The difference here being that religious objections to homosexuality could actually be a legitimate reason to refuse someone service as opposed to "lol fuck black people." If, say a baker, was a devout Christian/Muslim/whatever, it would fly in the face of their beliefs to make a cake for a gay wedding. I'm pretty sure the intent of this law is to protect religious people, not actively attack gay people.

[QUOTE=Secrios;43997368]What ever happened to hate the sin, but love the sinner? How can you physically serve sin a drink?[/QUOTE] Why would you hate the sin anyway, in this case homosexuality, unless you were [I]told[/I] it was bad [QUOTE=Alan Ninja!;43999242]The difference here being that religious objections to homosexuality could actually be a legitimate reason to refuse someone service as opposed to "lol fuck black people." If, say a baker, was a devout Christian/Muslim/whatever, it would fly in the face of their beliefs to make a cake for a gay wedding. I'm pretty sure the intent of this law is to protect religious people, not actively attack gay people.[/QUOTE] "It's my religion" isn't an excuse at all Basically "I will/won't do so and so because the organised set of beliefs I'm [voluntarily] subscribed to says I should/shouldn't", would that not sound completely irrational or deluded if it wasn't said from a religious point of view

[QUOTE=Alan Ninja!;43999242]The difference here being that religious objections to homosexuality could actually be a legitimate reason to refuse someone service as opposed to "lol fuck black people."[/QUOTE] But by that logic if your religion objected black people it would be the same? Maybe? Sorry if I'm misreading this. [editline]21st February 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Laputa;43999256]Why would you hate the sin anyway, in this case homosexuality, unless you were [I]told[/I] it was bad[/QUOTE] Not to mention the fact that the bible doesn't even really mention homosexuality, like the whole "shall not lay with a man as he shall lay with a woman" is actually about owning people/slavery if you read it in context.

[QUOTE=noneshallpass;43999324]But by that logic if your religion objected black people it would be the same? Maybe? Sorry if I'm misreading this.[/QUOTE] I guess you could try it but you'd have a really hard time actually making that argument in court unless your judge was a hundred-year-old Mormon or something.

[QUOTE=noneshallpass;43999324]But by that logic if your religion objected black people it would be the same? Maybe? Sorry if I'm misreading this. [editline]21st February 2014[/editline] Not to mention the fact that the bible doesn't even really mention homosexuality, like the whole "shall not lay with a man as he shall lay with a woman" is actually about owning people/slavery if you read it in context.[/QUOTE] I'm actually curious about this context now, that's a real kicker if the rallying cry of the homophobic turns out to be ground rules for slavery

[QUOTE=noneshallpass;43999324]in context.[/QUOTE] Only now that gay people have been given considerable emancipation is it "taken out of context" And if it's open to interpretation like so many Christian apologists say, then it can be interpreted for bad, and justified

[QUOTE=Alan Ninja!;43999242]The difference here being that religious objections to homosexuality could actually be a legitimate reason to refuse someone service as opposed to "lol fuck black people." If, say a baker, was a devout Christian/Muslim/whatever, it would fly in the face of their beliefs to make a cake for a gay wedding. I'm pretty sure the intent of this law is to protect religious people, not actively attack gay people.[/QUOTE] They're making a cake, not adjudicating over the fucking ceremony. Why does it matter to them what happens with the cake once they get paid? They don't even have to put the two groom/bride figures on top, they can just hand them over when the cake is picked up.

Is there anything in the Bible that actually says that you can't hire gays or something along the lines of that?

[QUOTE=elevate;43999460]Is there anything in the Bible that actually says that you can't hire gays or something along the lines of that?[/QUOTE]Nah, it's just derived from the old Leviticus line of gay people should be killed. Notice how most supposedly devout Christians cling to that verse, yet disregard the ones saying disobedient children should be beaten or killed, those who work on the Sabbath should be killed, wearing more than one type of materials is forbidden etc. If they're fine with disregarding all the other Old Testament rules, they can bloody well learn to disregard the one about gays.

[QUOTE=dai;43999373]I'm actually curious about this context now, that's a real kicker if the rallying cry of the homophobic turns out to be ground rules for slavery[/QUOTE] Don't quote me, because I'm not American or Christian but if I recall correctly, in leviticus 18 god tells people a list of shit not to do, and one of them is like literally translated roughly as "do not lay with a man as you would a woman, it is evil". But as you can see in leviticus 26 [img]http://i.imgur.com/RrKIxil.png?1[/img] sorry if this is too small, but this passage was brought up when the south tried to keep their slaves (also the website is bible gateway if you would prefer a different version of the bible) but yeah basically it's been thought that it was more about how sleeping with a man [i]how you would a woman[/i] is implying that when you slept with women at the time it meant you owned them and to not take dominance over your fellow man. [editline]21st February 2014[/editline] of course though, people are going to interpret it however they want.

[QUOTE=PSI Guy;43998538]i guess they see it as a double standard at their cost? since (in their minds) it's not ok for them to be intolerant to others, but it's fine for people to be intolerant towards their beliefs[/QUOTE] I kind of understand that but what kind of mental gymnastics are required to convince yourself that inclusive and exclusive beliefs are the same thing

[QUOTE=noneshallpass;43998443]I really don't know what to say other than for 100 years, people of African descent were not allowed to participate in temple ceremonies. And that practice in itself is completely absurd.[/QUOTE] Im really sick and tired of people bashing the LDS religion. I was born and raised LDS and i currently do not practice the religion anymore due to my own choice but i do respect their morals and standards and the religion in itself. They like any other religion have had changed in the religion. Also the RELIGION itself is not anti-gay but some of the people can be completely judgemental assholes like anyone else in any other religion. I know some shitty ass mormon people but yet I know some who are some of the best people in the world. Same thing with catholics and jewish people. It simply comes down to people being the problem. People don't respect other peoples opinions

[QUOTE=Strikelol;43999726]Im really sick and tired of people bashing the LDS religion. I was born and raised LDS and i currently do not practice the religion anymore due to my own choice but i do respect their morals and standards and the religion in itself. They like any other religion have had changed in the religion. Also the RELIGION itself is not anti-gay but some of the people can be completely judgemental assholes like anyone else in any other religion. I know some shitty ass mormon people but yet I know some who are some of the best people in the world. Same thing with catholics and jewish people. It simply comes down to people being the problem. People don't respect other peoples opinions[/QUOTE] ok,so first, I'm not bashing LDS, I was stating a real thing that actually happened and was disgusting, I would have a problem if any group did this. And yes I will agree that the base ideas of religion are good. However I have a problem with treating people differently because of their skin color/gender/orientation, and then changing their opinions later when the original opinions were preached to masses as absolutely the word of god/divinely inspired.

[QUOTE=Strikelol;43999726]People don't respect other peoples opinions[/QUOTE] Where people's opinions are derived shouldn't be overlooked [QUOTE=noneshallpass;43999788]And yes I will agree that the base ideas of religion are good.[/QUOTE] Depends on the religion [QUOTE=noneshallpass;43999788]and then changing their opinions later when the original opinions were preached to masses as absolutely the word of god/divinely inspired.[/QUOTE] It just shows the entire thing was just made up by humans and has had to give so much ground over the years, as opposed to some supposedly infallible omnipotent celestial dictator

[QUOTE=noneshallpass;43999788]ok,so first, I'm not bashing LDS, I was stating a real thing that actually happened and was disgusting, I would have a problem if any group did this. And yes I will agree that the base ideas of religion are good. However I have a problem with treating people differently because of their skin color/gender/orientation, and then changing their opinions later when the original opinions were preached to masses as absolutely the word of god/divinely inspired.[/QUOTE] All good I get my jimmies rustled easily on that religion. But yes that is why i do not want to be a part of that religion

[QUOTE=Strikelol;43999871]All good I get my jimmies rustled easily on that religion. But yes that is why i do not want to be a part of that religion[/QUOTE] oh, don't worry it's cool, I'm aware that a lot of Americans bash LDS without knowing why.

Selling state-sponsored discrimination as "religious freedom" is an insult to the religious.

Oh lol, the comments. [IMG]http://gyazo.com/5ac9662abf94b2d54bd91f19cd9a5bca.png[/IMG]

How can people be this free of rational thought...

I wish sexual orientation was part of the Civil Rights Act. But noooooo. congress (or scotus at least, SOMEONEEE) pls use your powers for good to slap some of these states to remind them that shitting on people because of their sexual orientation isn't okay.

[QUOTE=Pnukup;44000455]How can people be this free of rational thought...[/QUOTE] When you ask them exactly this, and I've done this before, they just ask you to allow them to practice and profess their beliefs (read: delusions) in peace.

Wasn't there another state that did something like this not too long ago?

I can't wait for a Muslim woman to open a restaurant and refuse service to all men because of her religion, just to see how fast they backpeddle on this law.

[QUOTE=Nasal_Spray;43998006]Ahh, that makes sense. I thought this forum was full of the classic type of nerds (fat, ugly bloke who goes all gooey around breeding age females and lives in his mothers cellar) as opposed to "gay nerds" (fat, ugly pansy who goes all gooey around [del]breeding[/del] similar aged males and lives in his two mothers cellar). It explains all this gay pandering I've seen on the forums.[/QUOTE] It's not gay pandering you fuckwhit, it's called adhering to the 14th Amendment.