B
BillP
Guest
Having a lesser degree of prejudice is still prejudice.
Ask yourself if someone who was willing to serve Black people to-go orders, but not to let them eat in his restaurant would be acceptable?
- Status
Ask yourself if someone who was willing to serve Black people to-go orders, but not to let them eat in his restaurant would be acceptable?
A
ajecphotos
Guest
Really? All they are doing is baking a cake!!
N
nodito
Guest
I would say that the restaurant owner was being unfair and bigoted, because there’s nothing sinful about eating in a restaurant. But Bill, I think you’re failing to see the distinction that I’m making. It’s not the people, but the event, that I have a problem with. If a heterosexual couple asked to buy a cake for some event I considered immoral, I would also refuse them. And likewise, if a homosexual couple asked for a birthday cake, I would not refuse them.
I suspect you and I differ on the morality of two members of the same sex attempting marriage. But by way of comparison, is there any event that you would refuse to bake a cake for?
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
When’s the last time a cake for cohabitation or a divorce was ordered from a wedding business?
O
on_the_hill
Guest
As in, would you bake a cake for the grand opening celebration of a Planned Parenthood clinic…
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
Hello Nodito:
My suggestion would give control over the presentation of the cake to the baker. What the baker decides to do, I leave up to his or her conscience, and the advice of a good spiritual adviser. The critical points are: (1) the baker’s freedom of expression (and therefore his or her right to religious expression) are preserved; (2) there is less incentive for an activist to push the issue into the public eye; and (3) the parties agree to resolve their dispute in a private mediation, with each side bearing its own costs. If the gay couple were acting in good faith, and just wanted a nice cake, they may want to look elsewhere. I would even suggest that the baker give references to other bakery shops that don’t have the same moral conflict.
Peace,
Robert
B
BillP
Guest
You missed the point.
Divorcees and people who are cohabiting are, according to Catholic teaching, ineligible for marriage, as are Catholics who wish to marry non-Catholics unless they are properly dispenses by their local ordinary.
If the baker is willing to turn a “blind eye” to these offenses against marriage, but not homosexuals, then his problem isn’t the sanctity or dignity of marriage, its with homosexuals.
A
ajecphotos
Guest
All a load of fuss over nothing!
Gay or not, its only a cake being made not the baker marrying them!!
Gay or not, its only a cake being made not the baker marrying them!!
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
In all of your examples, the marriage being proposed is not contrary to the very definition of marriage, although there are (in twoof your examples) impediments to the proposed marriage. If two divorcees want to marry, the marriage they propose is not un-natural, but both will need to obtain a declaration of nullity for their prior marriage before it is allowed in a Catholic Church. There is no problem with cohabiters marrying, assuming they meet the other requirements and have neither has been previously married to someone else. At least they are taking steps to legitimize their union. Regarding undispensed marriages, although they are against Church law, they can be convalidated at any later date, and the marriage proposed is not against nature.
Regarding an attempted same-sex marriage, it can never be made legitimate. The act of attempting such a union runs contrary to the teaching of the Church on what a marriage really is. That’s the nature of the scandal and it does not exist in any of your alternative scenarios. It is a fundamental change in the definition of marriage, as opposed to merely being a proposed marriage that does not comply with Catholic teaching. It is therefore a much greater cause for scandal for a Catholic to participate at any level in the celebration of such an attempt.
Respectfully, I do not think the participation issue arises from prejudice to individuals, but upon the objection to the redefinition of the institution.
Peace,
Robert
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
You are entitled to your opinion on the matter. But can you really discount entirely those who believe that providing a wedding cake to an attempted “gay marriage” amounts to participation in the celebration of an event that fundamentally changes the institution of marriage. For better or worse (pardon the pun) the wedding cake in today’s culture is a symbol and focal point of the celebration. It is an artistic, even iconic, display of joy and celebration. To provide that focal point, for some, is a substantial participation. This is an issue that will not go away simply because some see no problem with it. It is a matter of conscience.
Peace,
Robert
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
You miss the point BillP. The distinction is that in your scenarios the issues are a matter of Canon law. A so-called “gay marriage” is contrary to the very nature of the institution of marriage itself. It is one thing to turn a “blind eye” to irregularities of form. It is quite another to substantially cooperate in a celebration of a union that by its existence redefines the institution of marriage.
Peace,
Robert
N
nodito
Guest
No, they’re not.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
This is yet another example as to how liberalism and progressivism kill the market.
I don’t recognize that as a marriage. :nope: :dts:
No it isn’t. It’s still discrimination. And that’s supposed to be bad, right?
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
:nope: :dts:
People who are cohabiting were just married by the Pope, so…
So what if it is? Let the free market work.
S
someperson555
Guest
Absolutely not. This attitude towards homosexuality and sexuality is ridiculous.
There is nothing sinful about legalizing same sex marriage since it is frankly none of any religions business if two gay people want a civil marriage, or if a straight person wants a polygamous marriage.
You know whats really insane? Is that abortion was legal while same sex marriage is still viewed as taboo. That says A LOT about American catholics. Apparently murdering a baby is not as bad as homosexuality or sex outside of marriage.
Its so insane that on tv its ok to show all kinds of violence yet if you show any nudity the moralists get all hootie tootie.
Its insane that when given a choice between a pro life democrat who happens to support same sex marriage or a republican who is a power hungry war monger ( but masquerades as a pro marriage candidate) the American catholics will still vote for the the latter.
YES the state should ban abortion ( because its a crime against justice) but the state has no duty to enforce private morality.
Ugh religious people everywhere have their morality so skewed.
Making a cake for a gay wedding isnt really such a big deal. I mean I don’t share the Catholic churchs view on sexual Morality but EVEN IF I DID I fail to see how its a sin to merely bake gay people a cake. Its not like YOURE the one getting married. I think this is just an opportunity for overly zealous people to flex their catholicism and say " look everyone, im such a GOOD Catholic)
There is nothing sinful about legalizing same sex marriage since it is frankly none of any religions business if two gay people want a civil marriage, or if a straight person wants a polygamous marriage.
You know whats really insane? Is that abortion was legal while same sex marriage is still viewed as taboo. That says A LOT about American catholics. Apparently murdering a baby is not as bad as homosexuality or sex outside of marriage.
Its so insane that on tv its ok to show all kinds of violence yet if you show any nudity the moralists get all hootie tootie.
Its insane that when given a choice between a pro life democrat who happens to support same sex marriage or a republican who is a power hungry war monger ( but masquerades as a pro marriage candidate) the American catholics will still vote for the the latter.
YES the state should ban abortion ( because its a crime against justice) but the state has no duty to enforce private morality.
Ugh religious people everywhere have their morality so skewed.
Making a cake for a gay wedding isnt really such a big deal. I mean I don’t share the Catholic churchs view on sexual Morality but EVEN IF I DID I fail to see how its a sin to merely bake gay people a cake. Its not like YOURE the one getting married. I think this is just an opportunity for overly zealous people to flex their catholicism and say " look everyone, im such a GOOD Catholic)
A
ajecphotos
Guest
Agree ^^^^^^^^^
Some people will make a mountain out of a mole hill!
Some people will make a mountain out of a mole hill!
N
nodito
Guest
What attitude is that?
We’re not arguing whether it should be legalized or not (though for the record, there are strong non-religious reasons for opposing a redefinition of marriage). We’re discussing the morality of refusing to participate in a gay wedding if you do find it objectionable.
I’d wager that most individuals who oppose same sex marriage would also object to abortion. I don’t see the dichotomy you do. Of course murder is worse than sex outside of marriage.
Hootie tootie, eh? That’s fun. I kind of feel like you’ve gone off on an a pet topic here. It sounds like something you’re upset about it, but I don’t think it’s terribly relevant to the conversation about whether a person should bake a cake for an event they object to.
I think this is the crux of our disagreement. You don’t share the Church’s opinion on sexual morality, so you see no problem with the cake. But since you seem to agree that abortion is evil, how would you react if asked to bake a cake for the local Planned Parenthood, or for a young woman who wished to celebrate her upcoming abortion? I think you would be within your rights to decline baking those cakes, and I wouldn’t see it as you trying to show off how Catholic you are.
T
Thomas1981
Guest
Anytime someone brings up the “Selma Analogy” as I’ve taken to calling it, it proves to be a red herring. Segregation was not specific to some event but blanket discrimination based on race. No one is talking about refusing services to gay people generally, simply events (gay marriages) that are contrary to the religious convictions of many (and not just Catholics). The better analogy would be a black person coming into a shop to get a cake decorated with Nation of Islam or the Black Panther Party. The cake is connected to a particular event that the owner finds immoral and/or against his/her beliefs. They would be within their rights to reject it and it has nothing to do with the persons blackness.
I’m not even saying that a Catholic could not necessarily provide the cake for the hypothetical gay wedding and avoid sin, but that is up to their conscience and protected by the First Amendment. The “cake” is symbolic for the many, many instances that will pop up if (likely when) gay marriage becomes legal and it’s better to get a jump on this and protect our rights to practice our faith (even if we don’t agree with someone’s judgment on this). If religious people and LGBT community are going to coexist without trouble then there must be respect for religious objections to certain practices like this, or the LGBT rights regime will be an anti-religion coercive regime. Getting hung up on the specifics of the “cake” is missing the forest from the trees.
Frankly, I’m shocked that so many people seem willing to throw the Constitutional protections for religion under the bus so quickly and so easily when confronted with the combination of saccharine sweet language about “our love” mixed with bullying hate for anyone who disagrees. This has caused me to think that this country really has drifted too far away from its roots in liberty.
The LGBT activists are turning into the hateful bigots that they have always railed against. If they see religious refusal to provide services to a gay wedding as evidence as hateful animus, the feeling is mutual. In a free and just society there should be reasonable ways for religious believers and sexual minorities to coexist without coercion. Believers have been more reasonable on this issue, believe it or not.
S
someperson555
Guest
Ok. I see your point.
I guess if these bakery owners refused to bake a cake out of sincere conviction and not merely just to show their religious views then I support them.
However despite this cake issue which I think both sides are blowing WAAAY out of proportion I still think its very unwise of religions to oppose same sex marriage. It is so detrimental to the Catholic church to be on this crusade against same sex a marriage and pornography ( while we are on the subject) which is ultimately pointless.
History has proven countless times that repression doesnt work. And the early church fathers would agree with me.
I dont think there are any legit non religious reasons to oppose same sex marriage. The phrase " mind your own business" refutes all those reasons lol.
Although I am against giving any sort of monetary benefits for same sex couples. Niether do I think they should be treated equally. Dont mistake me for a liberal. I find myself hated by both religious and liberal anti theists lol. I do NOT say homosexuality is normal. In fact I think its a mental disorder ( but a lot of times people do fake it just for attention. Especially girls). Nevertheless they have every right to be mentally ill and to live out their mental illness as long as its not hurting anyone .
I wish the catholic church would realize how utterly pointless their crusade against secular gay marriage is. It only ends up hurting the catholic church in the end! Cant you see that? Not to mention all that time and energy could be put into our pro life movement. Or our anti war movement.
And about What I said earlier. It is a huge problem. It seems to me that religious people think sex is the worst kind of sin. After all how is it that abortion was legalized before gay marriage or polygyny?? That is messed up. Its also messed up how American Catholics oppose contraception yet praise murderers like Chris kyle.
That tells me a lot a lot of people just support or reject beliefs based on their feelings and cultural background. Not for any legit reason.
T
Thomas1981
Guest
On this we agree. I think most Catholics understand that the government is likely to recognize gay marriage, it’s already here for most of us. This effort is more about fighting repression of religious conscience coming from the other side.
- Status