Baker denies a "wedding cake" to a same sex couple

[Orogeny]

Your not really teaching anything to me all your doing is saying it is in scripture.

Well, I see you are not open to learning, so I’ll bow out of this discussion at this point.

Just a suggestion, though. When you get a bit older and more mature, take a look at the scripture I have repeatedly asked you to look at and then think about your insistence that we shouldn’t judge or when you ask what Jesus would do. You might understand why I asked you to read that passage.

Peace

Tim

 

[severus68]

**All of us are sinners.
Repeating that for the tenth time?
**

I won’t get better.
The disease in rheumatoid arthritis.
There is no cure. It’s primary symptom is PAIN.

Oh dear. Catharina, you will be in my prayers. I do understand. God bless, comfort and give you strength.

 

[catharina]

So…just to confirm…any christian who would have baked the cake thinking she was being a regular businesswoman and a kind person, would have been acting immorally and against God’s will, right?

Similarly…if the couple went into a dress shop and wanted to buy wedding dresses for their ceremony…the owner of the dress shop, again, should turn them away, yes?
And the restaurant where they might hold their reception…they should refuse to serve them, too?
And the catering company…the florist…the balloon guy…the people who print the invitations…the limo driver to take them to the wedding…the guy in the diamond district who sells the wedding bands they’ll use…the lady at the shoe store…the DJ or band hired to play music at the post-wedding reception…the photographer hired to take wedding pics…once they all find out it’s a gay wedding, they should all turn them away, right?

That is what God wants?
I just wanna be *clear *on this…

I do wonder, though, why God, who created everything, bothered making people gay if he’s just going to put them through all this.

It sure would have been helpful if Jesus himself, the founder of Christianity, had addressed this topic directly in his three years roaming about and teaching, since it seems to be such a big sin…comparable to murder and abortion, say some posters here.

I assume he himself did not say anything specific or insistent about it since none of the writers/editors of the official bible put together in the 300s included anything specific about it in his own words.
I just did a quick check now and only found the more general “one flesh” quote and the “sexual immorality” quote by Jesus, but nothing from him on homosexuality.

Oh well!

A sola Scripture Orthodox? How unusual. New to me.

You’re at a disadvantage here since adult Catholics recognize that we have a
teacher in Holy Mother Church. It is to our great advantage to learn what the
Church is teaching re such things as “your issue”, to accept it, to abide by it.

 

[Corki]

That is what God wants?
I just wanna be *clear *on this…

I do wonder, though, why God, who created everything, bothered making people gay if he’s just going to put them through all this.

Be careful with this line of reasoning. The same could be said of people who are aflicted with pedophilia, schizophrenia, or many othe life-long disorders. Do you blame them on God too?

God did not “make” anyone homosexual. It is a serious misunderstanding to confuse God’s soverign will and God’s permissive will. God does not want anyone to live a life of sin, even the sin of homosexul acts.

 

[catharina]

Are you against the court system then and are you anarchist? If I can’t tell you what you did is wrong, how can I prosecute you for it in a court of law? Or is there a difference between telling someone what they did is wrong, and telling them its a sin?

Thanks!

What against the Court System?

Seriously? All I did was look the definition up on Google and copy it!

The anti-Christ. Yep you got me a 13 year old is so the anti-Christ

You seem to have gone into emotional overdrive. The poster asked "are you against the court system. It involves judging people. Then he asked if you are an anarchist NOT the antiChrist) since you seem to support the theory of chaos, judging no one and nothing.

Don’t you have any homework to do??

Pehaps he could take a bike ride - or a nap? I took a nap. Feel much better.

**Or perhaps we should wait for a dozen years 'til his brain has matured.  I say that, SG, because I get the sense that you LIKE to argue - probably more than you like to learn.**

 

[catharina]

Ah! You are still here!
(after all that debate, thought you’d gone to bed exhausted…)

What is “your issue”? Not comprehending…

No, I’m back. I took a nap.
Return to Post 358, please. I await your response.

 

[catharina]

Oh dear. Catharina, you will be in my prayers. I do understand. God bless, comfort and give you strength.

I thank you so much for your prayers.

Must say too, it’s not too bad.
Was just diagnosed four yrs ago.

 

[Castello]

He/she should wait to be married until the annulment is given. Until that point it would be adultery. Your point is a small difference but is inconsequential. A better point might be can a wedding cake baker survive financially if they denied cake’s to divorced people in a civilization with a divorce rate near 50%.

Remember an invalid heterosexual attempt at marriage does not violate natural law.

Homosexual acts DO violate natural law.

 

[michelleds]

This 13 year old’s belligerent attitude and arrogance is grating on me and I think we are doing him no good by continuing to engage him as we would another adult.

+1

 

[catharina]

Hi Catharina…I’ve read this info in several books (including “Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why”) and also find it on dozens and dozens of online magazines/encyclopedias/biblical forums when I do a quick search…for example:

**
ThinkChristian.net**:
…the most famous cases are where entire verses and stories were added apparently long after the original gospels were written. The story of the angry mob who caught an adulterer, in which Jesus told them that anyone without sin should cast the first stone, isn’t in any early copy of the gospel of John…

**
Biblegateway.com:**
…It was almost certainly not part of John’s original Gospel. The NIV separates this passage off from the rest of the Gospel with the note, “The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53–8:11.” That is, the earliest Greek manuscripts, the earliest translations and the earliest church fathers all lack reference to this story… many manuscripts have marks that indicate the scribes “were aware that it lacked satisfactory credentials”…

**
Christianity Today** (christianitytoday.com/ct/2008/aprilweb-only/117-31.0.html…for the entire article):

…When Dallas Theological Seminary professor Daniel Wallace examined New Testament manuscripts stored in the National Archive in Albania last June, he was amazed by what he did not find.
The story of the woman caught in adultery, usually found in John 7:53-8:11, was missing from three of the texts, and was out of place in a fourth, tacked on to the end of John’s Gospel.
“This is way out of proportion for manuscripts from the 9th century and following,” Wallace said. “Once we get into that era, the manuscripts start conforming much more to each other. Thus, to find some that didn’t have the story is remarkable.”
Wallace called modern translations’ inclusion of the famous narrative, in which Jesus said, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” and told the woman to “go and sin no more,” the result of “a tradition of timidity.”
The Roman Catholic Church requires this story to be considered Scripture, and Protestants have not broken with that tradition, even though it is missing from the earliest and most reliable manuscripts…

Also, just saw it on The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church…Bible.org… Currents in Biblical Research…Wikipedia…etc, etc…

Thanks. None of your sources is Catholic.
All Christian groups outside of Catholicism tend to
spring from disagreement with the Catholic Church.
No surprise to me that some Christians still dissent as
generally, they are called Protestants. (Those who protest).

 

[Labarum]

We are also required by charity to assume the best in others when we don’t have a reason to think otherwise.

But in the case of same-sex marriage, there is nothing one can assume to make it valid.

Spot on!

 

[catharina]

Not blaming, but…as I said…wondering…

Actually, to be honest, I’m not really wondering. Because I already know what I think about this topic

You have defined your religion as “I believe in God”
and I’m wondering what that phrase means to you.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

So…just to confirm…any christian who would have baked the cake thinking she was being a regular businesswoman and a kind person, would have been acting immorally and against God’s will, right?

Similarly…if the couple went into a dress shop and wanted to buy wedding dresses for their ceremony…the owner of the dress shop, again, should turn them away, yes?
And the restaurant where they might hold their reception…they should refuse to serve them, too?
And the catering company…the florist…the balloon guy…the people who print the invitations…the limo driver to take them to the wedding…the guy in the diamond district who sells the wedding bands they’ll use…the lady at the shoe store…the DJ or band hired to play music at the post-wedding reception…the photographer hired to take wedding pics…once they all find out it’s a gay wedding, they should all turn them away, right?

That is what God wants?
I just wanna be *clear *on this…

I do wonder, though, why God, who created everything, bothered making people gay if he’s just going to put them through all this.

It sure would have been helpful if Jesus himself, the founder of Christianity, had addressed this topic directly in his three years roaming about and teaching, since it seems to be such a big sin…comparable to murder and abortion, say some posters here.

I assume he himself did not say anything specific or insistent about it since none of the writers/editors of the official bible put together in the 300s included anything specific about it in his own words.
I just did a quick check now and only found the more general “one flesh” quote and the “sexual immorality” quote by Jesus, but nothing from him on homosexuality.

Oh well!

The problem here is that you are portraying the situation as if it is a tragedy that the homosexual couple cannot get “married” in the same way a heterosexual couple would be. We have all been brainwashed to think it is cruel not to accept this deviancy (and it is deviancy, as it deviates from the norm) and even allow it to be celebrated. A generation ago, or two, this whole scenario would never have been imagined. Now, instead of the shock of seeing a couple of lesbians planning a wedding ceremony, the judgment falls instead on the people who (rightly) refuse to help them celebrate what God clearly forbids.

We hear “But they love each other!” “How bad can it be?” and “Why can’t you be more TOLERANT?” But that’s not even the issue.

The Episcopalian Church even denies the truth of the Bible in order to accommodate homosexuality. They deny the truth of Scripture in order to approve of what God clearly states is SINFUL! It’s torn their church apart.

The issue is not how cruel all those merchants would be to refuse the service to a couple of lesbians who want to get married. The issue is the fact that they are allowed to “marry” in the first place.

We as Catholics believe that people with same sex attraction are called to remain chaste and not become homosexuals (commit the sexual acts). So no, we are not going to celebrate when people are obviously NOT going to stay chaste. I know it can’t be easy, it must be a very big burden. But the alternative is sin.

 

[catharina]

?
I don’t understand.
None of these sources are disagreeing with the Catholic Church on anything…
These are actual, factual, scholarly findings…that have nothing to do with religious debate or dissent.
Please to explain…how do you see it at such?

If all the manuscripts of the bible for the first two hundred years don’t have the story in them…and then later ones do, and the story is found “tacked on” or written in as a sidenote by the original scribes, who themselves have concern’s of the story’s origin and validity…it’s not a matter of dissent, it’s just…a fact.

There may be Catholic sources, but it didn’t occur to me to specifically look for that. I will look, though.
(But how would I know if a “Christian” source is also a “Catholic” source?)

But it could be that Catholic scholars don’t look into this kind of stuff because they don’t have interest in this kind of search?

Are you worried that the non-Catholic Christians are for some reason, um…lying?

When you quote only sources that are Christian but non-Catholic, that
will always hold less weight for me than Catholic sources, since all of the
sources have a history of disagreeing with the Catholic Chruch.

It’s that simple. Your “sources” share a ‘natural’ bias.
Show me a Catholic source saying the same - then I’ll have a clue.

(… and BTW, I still have no idea the nature of your “religion.”
There must be more to it than “I believe in God,” yes???)

 

[catharina]

The problem here is that you are portraying the situation as if it is a tragedy that the homosexual couple cannot get “married” in the same way a heterosexual couple would be. We have all been brainwashed to think it is cruel not to accept this deviancy (and it is deviancy, as it deviates from the norm) and even allow it to be celebrated. A generation ago, or two, this whole scenario would never have been imagined. Now, instead of the shock of seeing a couple of lesbians planning a wedding ceremony, the judgment falls instead on the people who (rightly) refuse to help them celebrate what God clearly forbids.

We hear “But they love each other!” “How bad can it be?” and “Why can’t you be more TOLERANT?” But that’s not even the issue.

The Episcopalian Church even denies the truth of the Bible in order to accommodate homosexuality. They deny the truth of Scripture in order to approve of what God clearly states is SINFUL! It’s torn their church apart.

The issue is not how cruel all those merchants would be to refuse the service to a couple of lesbians who want to get married. The issue is the fact that they are allowed to “marry” in the first place.

We as Catholics believe that people with same sex attraction are called to remain chaste and not become homosexuals (commit the sexual acts). So no, we are not going to celebrate when people are obviously NOT going to stay chaste. I know it can’t be easy, it must be a very big burden. But the alternative is sin.

Juliane, YES!

 

[catharina]

Ah.
Okay, but I can tell you this for now…of the articles I’ve read on this topic, there seems to be no disagreement going on about it…no controversy or anything…no words from a rep of the Catholic religion saying “it’s not so” or anything like that…

Why would Catholics go around, piecemeal, knocking down Protestant theories?
We say one thing. Protestants say other things. Totally NOT news.

But I think we are too off-topic here on this.
If I have time to do more searching of C-sources, I’ll let ya know via message!

(re religion, I also have a bit more in there than just the God bit!)

the “God bit?” Yes, you say you were raised Orthodox.

… and now, you are … WHAT?

 

[catharina]

Oy vay!!! :hypno:
I was neutral and curious and shocked in my post …but not an ounce of judgment, unlike most of the other angry posts I’ve read here today.
And I really want to know what is considered “right” and “wrong” behavior to Catholics on this forum, which is why I’m here.
There are many people saying many different things, and I have to ask specific questions to understand-- I even pointed out I was asking such in order to clarify…

I already stated clearly that I feel it’s the baker’s perogative to work with whomever she feels comfortable with since it’s her own business.
I’ve already said…the best thing is that she should be more upfront about her business to people, and make it clear she will not do gay weddings, so that everybody is on the same page and she doesn’t waste her own or anybody else’s time.

The issue here is not the entire gay marriage debate.
The issue here is whether or not this woman should or should not have baked the cake and why…and if others feel and would do the same thing or not, and why.

We are here to find out what people think and feel and how they would act. Or, at least, that’s why I’m here.

There is nothing wrong with me wishing Jesus had specifically talked about this kind of topic in the bible, if that’s what you are referring to. Because his words affect what the Catholic religion believes, does it not?

Jesus taught what needed to be taught.
Wish whatever you want.

Teaching today comes through the Church.
He did not leave us orphans, as was His promise.

 

[Nate13]

Thanks! A girl’s gotta dream!
Phew!

Haha go to the Sacred Scripture forum and you will find plenty of debate about this. Post your question about how supposedly the “stone throwing story” was not originally apart of the gospel. I guarantee you there are PLENTY of Catholic sources that have looked into it.

 

[catharina]

Haha go to the Sacred Scripture forum and you will find plenty of debate about this. Post your question about how supposedly the “stone throwing story” was not originally apart of the gospel. I guarantee you there are PLENTY of Catholic sources that have looked into it.

Dear Nate - answer this post and you’'ll hit 1000 posts.
Go, man!

 

[SwissGuard25]

I see a lot of names here. Are you really being open? I won’t say go back and read this poster or that one. But please examine if you are open to learning or if you just feel like being contrary today?

Actually, I am not criticizing – just wondering? I remember being 13. Some people have spent a lot of time with you; at least respect that fact.

I do.

But there not really teaching me anything they’re just saying stuff.

I would like it if they taught and used scripture reference like I did.