Say again?

[Elizium23]

A law preventing discrimination is unjust? So, are you saying that laws created by the Vatican are unjust? Does the Vatican some how not have Christian values?!

#2358
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm#2358

“They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

So, we are not bound to respect a public sinner? Are you overriding the laws of the Vatican? Please, tell me the great authority that was bestowed upon you to be able to break these rules. It must be a great honor to be able to speak to one as powerful as you.

Individuals with homosexual feelings should not be discriminated against. Individuals of all types must be afforded civil rights in matters of housing, employment, transportation, and other things. However, the persons in question are a couple in an immoral relationship. The same would be true for an unmarried couple or an invalidly married couple. As an innkeeper, would you give a room to facilitate a sin? Someone else brought up the case of giving a knife to a killer. As a choir member, would I accept an invitation to sing for a Catholic who is being married outside the Church? No.

Discrimination is unjust predjudice against a person for their skin color, their beliefs, disability, etc. The refusal of goods or services to facilitate a sin is an entirely different matter. The Church sets a gentle example in her refusal to facilitate adoptions by gay couples. She acts justly because it is in the best interest of a child to have a father and a mother in a loving family unit. People not in a state of grace and non-Catholics may not receive the Eucharist. Is this discrimination by the priest? Should he give Eucharist to everyone who asks?

As you can see, it would be absurd for the Church to treat everyone the same. Likewise it is absurd for us to treat everyone the same. There are people and there are actions. Love the sinner, hate the sin. If you condone sinful actions then you yourself commit the sin of scandal.

If a man in striped pajamas with handcuffs on his wrists knocks on your door, do you let him in? Do you tell the police you don’t know where he went? This is not sheltering the homeless, my friend, this is aiding and abetting an escaped criminal. In this day and age, gays have a gun pointed at the head of Catholics. The gun is made of unjust laws and popular opinion. We have a reason to be afraid, but we should trust in God.

 

[Maryann_C]

There are a few places in which semicolons would have been better, that is it. Maryann C made several spelling and sentence structure errors, foolish ones at that.

Please take a red pen ( or highlighter)and mark away I will not be offended, I have lived as an English woman in America for too long to care any more about this argument and yet I would honestly be interested in your corrections - in your opinion. Would you spell neighbour thus or as neighbor? honor or honour?

 

[Maryann_C]

I believe that Ellen puts it best. huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/08/ellen-degeneres-one-million-moms-jc-penney_n_1262623.html Do you really think that your boycott of JC Penney is going to hurt them?
.

Now back to my point … I really do not care what Ellen or the Huffington post says on whether ( or do you suggest I should use weather?) or not I choose to exercise my right to take my $$s elsewhere… the point is not to “hurt them” , the point is to express my objection to their condoning certain practices that go against my beliefs.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

4,000 abortions a day? Where are you getting this number from? The CDC would have to disagree with you. cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/index.htm#Abortion

According to that, in 2008 there were approximately 2,261 abortions per day in the United States. These were the ones that were reported. Yes, that’s lower than 4,000 per day, but that was just for the one year. Now, if you consider that since 1973, there have been around 50 million abortions in the United States (Source: Guttmacher Institute, 2011, August. Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States.), you can do the math. Or I can. It comes to roughly 3500 abortions per year for forty years. Reported abortions, that is. Also, some people have noted that abortions are decreasing over the years, but usage of stuff such as “The Morning After Pill” has been noted to be increasing. Even if we were going to go by the low number of ~2000 per day, it’s hardly a figure that makes this a God-fearing country, is it? Abortion (murder) is still legalized in this country and changing numbers aren’t going to make that more moral.

Also, as Mattkubes said, you missed the point of my mentioning that statistic.

 

[Maryann_C]

Individuals with homosexual feelings should not be discriminated against. Individuals of all types must be afforded civil rights in matters of housing, employment, transportation, and other things. However, the persons in question are a couple in an immoral relationship. The same would be true for an unmarried couple or an invalidly married couple. As an innkeeper, would you give a room to facilitate a sin? Someone else brought up the case of giving a knife to a killer. As a choir member, would I accept an invitation to sing for a Catholic who is being married outside the Church? No.

Discrimination is unjust predjudice against a person for their skin color, their beliefs, disability, etc. The refusal of goods or services to facilitate a sin is an entirely different matter. The Church sets a gentle example in her refusal to facilitate adoptions by gay couples. She acts justly because it is in the best interest of a child to have a father and a mother in a loving family unit. People not in a state of grace and non-Catholics may not receive the Eucharist. Is this discrimination by the priest? Should he give Eucharist to everyone who asks?

As you can see, it would be absurd for the Church to treat everyone the same. Likewise it is absurd for us to treat everyone the same. There are people and there are actions. Love the sinner, hate the sin. If you condone sinful actions then you yourself commit the sin of scandal.

If a man in striped pajamas with handcuffs on his wrists knocks on your door, do you let him in? Do you tell the police you don’t know where he went? This is not sheltering the homeless, my friend, this is aiding and abetting an escaped criminal. In this day and age, gays have a gun pointed at the head of Catholics. The gun is made of unjust laws and popular opinion. We have a reason to be afraid, but we should trust in God.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Please, tell me the errors that I made. There are a few places in which semicolons would have been better, that is it. Maryann C made several spelling and sentence structure errors, foolish ones at that.

I wasn’t pointing it out to turn this into a debate about English grammar, but I did want to mention that it’s best not to point to grammar or spelling mistakes in order to ridicule or belittle another person’s post. Like as not, you’ll make mistakes in your own posts and someone will come along and do the same thing to you. In regard to your own post, I’ll just say to watch your plurals. There are a couple other points, too, but again, not the purpose.

 

[smiddle]

Our Pope was a member of the Hitler Youth and later the German military. Did this defy his religious beliefs? Yes, but he still did it because it was required by law. So, by being a member of the Hitler Youth and the military, did he contribute to the genocide of 6 million Jews? When a candle maker does business with a homosexual couple, are they condoning and supporting the homesexual lifestyle?

 

[Corki]

We are bound to respect the laws of our country. The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees citizens “full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.”

The candlemaker would be refusing to provide them with goods based on a religious belief that the customers did not share with him. This is a violation of the law, which would be a violation of what is clearly stated in Romans 13:1-7.

Read what you cut and pasted. The homosexual inclination of the couple is not one of those areas that is protected by the Civil Rights Act. Nor is their wish to simulate marriage. The religion of the business owner is irrelevant in Civil Rights law, unless the business is covered under a religious exemption.

There are some states and municipalities that have extended civil right protected class status to cover sexual orientation but it is not a universal protection in the US. There is no law that guarantees anyone the right to a particular good or service.

That being said, the OP brings up a few interesting points. Is this a shop that anyone can walk into or does the candlemaker take orders privately or by referral? In the wedding business, it is common for many of the vendors to be very selective about what clients they will work with. The candlemaker could become “selective” and would not need to give a reason to turn down a particular client.

Frankly, I think that any Chrisian involved in the wedding industry is going to have to get creative in order to avoid participation in immoral activities. Cultivating a select clinetele, working only from referrals, offering a limited selection of products (“sorry, we don’t carry groom and groom cake toppers”), etc.

 

[mattkubes]

Our Pope was a member of the Hitler Youth and later the German military. Did this defy his religious beliefs? Yes, but he still did it because it was required by law. So, by being a member of the Hitler Youth and the military, did he contribute to the genocide of 6 million Jews? When a candle maker does business with a homosexual couple, are they condoning and supporting the homesexual lifestyle?

He was conscripted to join by law, as all Germans youths were, but he also refused to attend meetings.

Really, you’re grasping at quite desperate straws now.

 

[Maryann_C]

We are bound to respect the laws of our country. The Federal Civil Rights Act guarantees citizens "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

The candlemaker would be refusing to provide them with goods based on a religious belief that the customers did not share with him. This is a violation of the law, which would be a violation of what is clearly stated in Romans 13:1-7.

My bold…hmmmm unless my reading ability is now also in question I do not see anything about “sexual orientation” but I am sure that is coming …it is the logical progression of our current trajectory. How can we discriminate against polygamy or a man and …well lets not go there… if 2 men or 2 women can marry?

The law states that we can not discriminate against a person because of THEIR religion not because my religion causes me to conscientiously object to their behavior on moral grounds. This was included in the law because there was a time when Catholics among others were discriminated against for their religion- "Neighbors called Catholics names, employers refused to promote them, landlords rented them their worst apartments, newspapers blamed them for rising crime rates, and banks refused them loans. A popular national organization, the American Protective Association, was founded specifically to promote anti-Catholicism and other prejudices. " source nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tserve/nineteen/nkeyinfo/nromcath.htm

 

[Elizium23]

When a candle maker does business with a homosexual couple, are they condoning and supporting the homesexual lifestyle?

Yep.

 

[smiddle]

He was conscripted to join by law, as all Germans youths were, but he also refused to attend meetings.

Really, you’re grasping at quite desperate straws now.

Actually, I’m not. It is required by law not to discriminate against them.

 

[mattkubes]

Actually, I’m not. It is required by law not to discriminate against them.

I’ve already explained this to you. Several times.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

I’ve already explained this to you. Several times.

And thus the reason for the title of the thread.

 

[smiddle]

The OP says that the same-sex couple asked him to make candles for their wedding.

Same-sex marriage is allowed in Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Washington D.C., Iowa and Washington. (statesthatallowgaymarriage.com/)

If he is making candles for a wedding, then they must reside in one of these states.

Currently, these states (and one federal district) have expanded their civil rights to include sexual orientation: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and Washington D.C. (irem.org/pdfs/publicpolicy/Anti-discrimination.pdf)

Homosexuals are protected from discrimination in all of the state in which gay marriage is legal. It would be a violation of the law to refuse them service.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Divine law trumps state law. How many times need it be said?

 

[smiddle]

Divine law trumps state law. How many times need it be said?

Well, then why would the Pope still join the Hitler Youth/military? Will a panel of martyrs look down on him and question why he did not entirely refuse to join? If divine law trumps state law, then he should have refused to join.

 

[Elizium23]

Well, then why would the Pope still join the Hitler Youth/military? Will a panel of martyrs look down on him and question why he did not entirely refuse to join? If divine law trumps state law, then he should have refused to join.

The Pope was conscripted by law against his will into these organizations, and you neglect to mention that he never attended meetings of the Youth, and deserted the army at his first chance! His actions spoke volumes about how he felt toward the Third Reich. Our actions should speak just as this holy man did.

inb4godwin

 

[AdamP88]

The two situations are completely different, to compare them makes no sense. It is a candle. Candles do not condone or show support for a lifestyle. Homosexual or not, people are still people. They should be treated with the respect that they deserve. It is not our job to discriminate against them in any way. In the eyes of the Church, the wedding is invalid, so to provide them with candles should not matter because the ceremony has no meaning. Unless the couple was requesting that he make candles bedazzled with the words “I support gay marriage” and display them in his store, he has no right or reason to refuse them business.

Besides, it’s a recession, are candle makers really in that high of a demand that they are in the position to refuse someone business and face the repercussions of a lawsuit?

If the Candle-Maker had sufficient reason to believe that the product was to be used in a marriage ceremony - he would be perfectly correct to refuse to make the candles. The fact of a recession or danger of a lawsuit does not change the fact that it is his moral obligation to refuse to comply with a moral evil.

I studied media in college and PC garbage was constantly shoved down your throat in the form of talk of “homophobia” and such.
No amount of political correctness should ever compromise our moral values.

 

[Ion]

If those guys desire was to simulate a catholic wedding - no
Otherwise - yes.
How did the first christians live in Rome?