# As a Christian, What Would You Do?  How Would you Feel?



## Shimmie (Oct 1, 2010)

Just your thoughts on this situation. In no way am I posting Controversy even though it is a controversal issue. 


With your thoughts, please share a scripture which yu feel supports your feelings. I'l lbe back after I dispose of my 'initial' reaction.    

I mean...... what about *our* rights to stand upon our Faith and Beliefs? 


*Okay.... Here's the article:* 

Bakery displays morals, now faces eviction (OneNewsNow.com)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Bakery displays morals, now faces eviction . . .*

An Indianapolis cookie shop could be evicted from its longtime location for refusing a special order from a college homosexual group.​ 









The bakery "Just Cookies" has operated in a city-owned market for over 20 years. The president of the board that oversees the market told the _Indianapolis Star_ that he would "hate to lose them" as a tenant -- but that could very well happen because owner David Stockton took a moral stand and did not want to endorse homosexual activity.​ 
Controversy arose this week after the owners of the bakery cited moral objections to a special-order request for rainbow-decorated cookies for next week's "National Coming Out Day" observance at a nearby university campus. Stockton told the caller he did not feel comfortable in supporting homosexual values, especially because it would not set a good example for his two daughters.​ 
Micah Clark of the American Family Association of Indiana says there are reports the city might evict Stockton, citing a local "anti-discrimination" statute.​ 
"Indianapolis passed a sexual-orientation city ordinance five years ago," Clark explains. "...We warned [at that time] that this type of thing would happen if they passed an ordinance elevating a sexual behavior to the same moral equivalent of race or skin color."​ 
*





Had the shop filled the special order, the owner felt he would be providing a microphone for homosexuals to celebrate their lifestyle. But there is another consideration, says Clark.*​ 
*"If this were a Muslim-owned bakery, what would happen?" he wonders. "I don't think the city would pursue it the way they're pursuing it now. I think this is part of the liberal agenda where people must conform to the views that our culture wants in support of homosexuality."*​ 
In an interview with the _Star_, the AFA of Indiana spokesman argued for the rights of business owners. "It's one thing if someone walks into a store and buys a cookie off the shelf, but [the Stocktons] were being asked to become part of the [pro-homosexual] celebration. To make rainbow cookies for a special event with which the company has a disagreement -- I think that goes beyond the pale of what we should expect companies to do."​ 
Meanwhile, homosexual groups are circulating memos encouraging people to stop purchasing at Just Cookies. Clark's response to that is to ask residents to do business there in support of the owners and their wholesome beliefs.​ 
The _Star_ reports the organizers of the homosexual celebration found another bakery to fill their order -- "The Flying Cupcake."​ 
-------------------------
My personal view is bolded in dark red above..... ​ 
I mean, Truly! ​ 
Suppose I went into a 'gay' owned, nanaged and established bakery and ordered a wedding cake that boldly stated, _"A Real Marriage is between a man and a woman only"_ and they in turn said that they could not fill the order because it was not their belief. ​ 
I'd just go to another bakery and accept that fact that they did not agree with me and move on. ​ 
*My scripture to support my view:*​ 
_If people do not welcome you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave their town . . . ----- Luke 9:5_​ 
Just go where you're accepted and stop crying about it. Dear Lord.​ 
Before 'anyone' miss-calls the Bakery owner a homophobe.... Pleazzzze. The homophobe is the manager of the building development. He's afraid of the gay commuuity or some other phobic entity who will cause him to lose business / future business rentals, if he appears non gay friendly. I've never seen so many cowards in all my days. ​ 
The REAL hero in this matter is the Bakery owner   I applaud him for taking a stand. God is blessing him for it already. 

He has the heart of Queen Esther.... "If I perish.... I perish"...... at least it was for the right cause!  ​


----------



## Laela (Oct 1, 2010)

If that were my bakery, they weren't getting no cookies, either.... lol

There really is a thin line between Loving people (which as God's people we are charged to do) and promoting their agenda or allowing them to abuse us. We can respectfully and politely tell someone "No" when we have boundaries that can't be crossed concerning our faith/beliefs.   There's a Christian health-care network  that simply stands up for it's beliefs and could easily be seen as "anti-gay".
Well, guess what? There are other health-care networks, just like there are other bakeries.

While we have a right to stand up for our beliefs and faith, I believe it's wrong to do so while tearing someone down. The former can easily be viewed by non-Christians as hatred, while the latter can create an illusion of standing up for what's right. We can never be right, doing wrong. Nor can we be ever go wrong, doing what's right.

Matthew 13:21 
_But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away. _


----------



## PinkPebbles (Oct 1, 2010)

Here is my issue:

How can Christians have a voice about the gay agenda when we fail to address the issues of homosexuality in our very own churches?

We want to tell the world what to do but we can't tell the people inside of the 4 walls what God deems holy and righteous.

We have flamboyant gay choir directors with a relaxer up on the pulpit and nobody addresses that. 

We have flamboyant gay men in the church mentoring the youth but nobody wants to address that.

We have married pastors sleeping with deacons and teenagers but nobody wants to address that.

Until we clean up our own house is when we will be able to make an impact outside of the four walls and be taken seriously.

Not too many people would have had the guts like the baker to turn down that order, so for that I applaud him. We need that same boldness inside the church!


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 1, 2010)

Laela said:


> If that were my bakery, they weren't getting no cookies, either.... lol
> 
> There really is a thin line between Loving people (which as God's people we are charged to do) and promoting their agenda or allowing them to abuse us. We can respectfully and politely tell someone "No" when we have boundaries that can't be crossed concerning our faith/beliefs.   There's a Christian health-care network  that simply stands up for it's beliefs and could easily be seen as "anti-gay".
> Well, guess what? There are other health-care networks, just like there are other bakeries.
> ...


 
This is so on point about... 'the thin line' which it is.  But yet we must maintain our stand.   Laela, you shared this so eloquently and it's the Truth.   

The scripture.... Wow!   Check it out, _'because he has no root in him, he quickly falls under the persecution.  _ 

Awesome Word!  

Thank you...


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 1, 2010)

PinkPebbles said:


> Here is my issue:
> 
> How can Christians have a voice about the gay agenda when we fail to address the issues of homosexuality in our very own churches?
> 
> ...



Pink Pebbles.... 

You know you're .......













RIGHT ! ! !     

So very right.  

Thank God it's not the majority of our Churches with their heads in the sand.   But it's those 'few' which are hammering such a negative impact. 

Excellent post!


----------



## Laela (Oct 1, 2010)

Matthew 13 






PinkPebbles said:


> Here is my issue:
> 
> How can Christians have a voice about the gay agenda when we fail to address the issues of homosexuality in our very own churches?
> 
> ...


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 1, 2010)

John 3:16  "For G-d so loved the world, He gave His only Begotten Son (for the remission of sins)."

Those sins belong to us all.  I don't agree that he wouldn't bake some cookies for a gay group.  What if a heterosexual group asked him to make breast cookies or penis cookies...what would he say (yes, there are desserts like that)?  He might be opposed but I could see why in that case, esp. with children.  They were only asking for cookies, not directions on how they live their lives and not some that were risque'.  

You can't judge another's life and discriminate against them and think that the bible allows it.  It doesn't.  It's like working in pharmacy, do you fill an abortive or Plan B pill or not if you are pro-life?  The choice to use it is in the other person's hands.  You have to provide service to all patients...and all bakery clients unless it's like the fore-mentioned.  And even if that were the case, you could put them in a special area for client-viewing only.   Doesn't mean one if immoral.  I don't have a problem with homosexuality.  Those are my 2 beads worth.



Edit:  "I don't have a problem with homosexuality....as far as accepting people as human."


----------



## Rainbow Dash (Oct 1, 2010)

This made me sad for the bakery owner but what came to my spirit was 2 Timothy 3:12  - Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. We must be willing to stand for Christ even when it seems unfair. 

I agree with the article, if it were a muslim cookie shop this would not be happening.  

This is the time to stand up for Christ. He warned us that this would happen but we must be of good cheer, while allowing the light of Christ to shine. 

My prayers go out to the owners and those who are walking in darkness.


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 1, 2010)

Health&hair28 said:


> This made me sad for the bakery owner but what came to my spirit was 2 Timothy 3:12  - Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. We must be willing to stand for Christ even when it seems unfair.
> 
> I agree with the article, if it were a muslim cookie shop this would not be happening.
> 
> ...



Exactly.  And in this time we as "Follower's of Jesus Christ are being 'tested' to see where we truly stand.  We cannot allow our faith to falter because of offense.  Jesus said that many would be 'offended for His sake.'  

gays are offended because they cannot have their way.  They've even transposed scripture to fit into their own self-made doctrines which supports their lifestyle and not what thus saith the Lord.  Where in God's word do we see a marriage between two of the same sex?   Yet, the gay theory is that God gives them a 'free pass to marry one another.   And this is just sad, because they are in tragic denial. 

It's truly no one's way except the Lord's.  His word says, 

I am the Lord and I 'CHANGE Not' !   (Malachi 3:6)

The mindset of the gay agenda is stout against the ordinance of God; in total and complete opposition.   

I'll quite frank here.  We as humans cannot change the order of God, none of us can. 

So for them to get upset about a 'cookie' is a bag of crumbs in comparison to the real issue of their precious souls whom God truly loves.  

And who said they could use God's rainbow as their logo....  

Sorry....


----------



## FoxxyLocs (Oct 3, 2010)

There is absolutely no comparison between a pharmacists responsibility and a bakery owners right to turn away clients.


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 3, 2010)

rx2008 said:


> There is absolutely no comparison between a pharmacists responsibility and a bakery owners right to turn away clients.


 
In principle, yes, there absolutely is.  It's called "respect."  I didn't see where they wanted bakery goods that were explicit in design.  You cannot discriminate.  Of course, people will take the other side and say you can't discriminate against a christian's beliefset.  Well, we cannot discriminate against anybody.  Professional judgment is one thing but he's prejudiced.  How is baking an order going against a biblical mandate?  It's not like he's condoning sodomy or something, he's just baking up an order.  He doesn't like gays...we get that.  But is this emotionally based or what?  He might as well put up a sign that says:

No service to gays

If he had a sign up, he could and should be sued.  But since he did it underhandedly, he's crying about his religious beliefs in a pluralistic society called the U.S.  I truly don't get it and it has nothing to do with my own life.  Question is, what is the solution?


----------



## joy2day (Oct 3, 2010)

Volver, I must tell you; I have been saying this for years, I have a real problem with a community of people elevating their sexual preference to the level of civil/human rights. Their struggle is not like mine; it is not based on skin color or religious preference. As an African-American in this country, we have had to fight far too long and hard, only to now have our "civil rights" issues to now be shared on a platform with an individual's sexual desire. Frankly I am utterly ashamed at our current crop of so called "civil rights leaders" for not drawing the distinction and making it clear.

The rainbow in the Bible represents covenant. In the Book of Genesis, Chapter 9, verses 13 - 15, God uses the rainbow to illustrate a covenant with Noah and his decendants. It reads:

*"I [God] set My bow [rainbow] in the cloud, and it shall be a token or a sign of a covenant or solemn pledge between Me and the earth. And it shall be that when I bring clouds over the earth and the bow [rainbow] is seen in the clouds, I will [earnestly] remember My covenant or solemn pledge which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters will no more become a flood to destroy and make all flesh corrupt."*

The rainbow is very powerful symbolism. There is a spirit of deception at the root of all of this that knows what the rainbow represents to God, and His people. The Bakery owner took a stand. This isn't about baking cookies, love. This is about coming into covenant with a lifestyle that is not in God's divine order. This is about not backing down and cowering to men on this earth that want to label Christians (moreso than any other religion), "homophobes" when we take a stand for what we believe. Clearly the Bible states that entering into "same sex relationships" Levitcus 18:19, "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman," is not in His Will. This is not about passing "moral judgement" on the GLBT community; it is about being one that can think for one's self. There is no way that I am going to "conform to this world" on this issue. The GLBT community has made it abundantly clear that they are going to press their issue, and I intend with all that I have in me to stand for what the Bible clearly says is right.

As to your question of solution, maybe somone else has a solution. I personally don't see a solution coming out of this issue. We are in the last days, and the lines have been drawn. The battle cry has gone out from Heaven. There is no turning back now. 

"He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit is saying to the church."


----------



## FoxxyLocs (Oct 3, 2010)

He owns the bakery. its his own business. if he chooses not to have his business associated with something he doesn't believe in, that's his right. just like a gay bakery owner shouldn't have to accept business from anti-gay clients. if they don't like it they can buy their cookies elsewhere.


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 3, 2010)

joy2day said:


> Volver, I must tell you; I have been saying this for years, I have a real problem with a community of people elevating their sexual preference to the level of civil/human rights. Their struggle is not like mine; it is not based on skin color or religious preference. As an African-American in this country, we have had to fight far too long and hard, only to now have our "civil rights" issues to now be shared on a platform with an individual's sexual desire. Frankly I am utterly ashamed at our current crop of so called "civil rights leaders" for not drawing the distinction and making it clear.
> 
> The Bakery owner took a stand. This isn't about baking cookies, love. This is about coming into covenant with a lifestyle that is not in God's divine order. This is about not backing down and cowering to men on this earth that want to label Christians (moreso than any other religion), "homophobes" when we take a stand for what we believe. Clearly the Bible states that entering into "same sex relationships" Levitcus 18:19, "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman," is not in His Will. This is not about passing "moral judgement" on the GLBT community; it is about being one that can think for oneself. There is no way that I am going to "conform to this world" on this issue. The GLBT community has made it abundantly clear that they are going to press their issue, and I intend with all that I have in me to stand for what the Bible clearly says is right.
> 
> ...



The Civil Rights Movement was rather nipped in the bud at the time that it was definitely expanding to include all people, not just Blacks, especially poor and middle-class whites.  King, Jr. was murdered.  No one wanted that large of an organization and movement to polarize that many people across race, religion and whatnot.  Civil Rights is for everybody, even those who aren't christians.

The rainbow symbol is old and is not just represented in christian belief.  It's a universal sign. Whether men and women have same-sex relationships is not going to stop the christian community from living its values.  But that value cannot force another to accept it.  Where's the drawing line?  I don't know.  But I realize that law is based upon religious values...murder, crime etc.  How far to draw the line?  

Do we not extend rights to criminals, foreigners etc.?  This is not just a religious issue but is an issue involving the general community and those people's rights were violated, actually.  It was discrimination and that is against the law.  

I think the GLBT "community" wants the same rights afforded to everybody else.  Do I believe there can be a marriage between same-sex?  No, not in a judeo-christian model.  But I do not have the right to impose my beliefs on another person.  Maybe it's vice-versa, this situation.   If it's something dealing with doctrine and church etc., I can see their point.  But this is a public space offering services to the public.  I don't agree with polygamists but I don't discriminate against them just because I believe they are not living some biblical standard.  

I guess I want to know how people think they are actually helping the community by refusing service to someone rather than living by example.  Should Congressmen only express christian values?  There's a reason for separation between church and state and I'm glad for it.  There are so many differences within one faith to cause a host of problems if one group feels it needs to dominate the other philosophically.  How one lives their lives is personal.  There's a limit on what can be forced...either way.  I just don't see how he was coming into covenant with a lifestyle he doesn't condone by offering services.  He's not going to have a same-sex experience, he was supposed to bake cookies.  Does he ask the sexual experiences of all his heterosexual clients to find out if they are fornicating?  Shrugs.

Does no one remember "white-only" signs and service anymore?  I just spoke with someone today who told me about his reform because he was raised to think it a sin for people to mix their race with Whites.  Now he has 1/2 Aborigine nephews of whom he's proud and loving.  It's really very similar, if you truly look at it.


----------



## Laela (Oct 3, 2010)

GV,

Living by example doesn't equate to giving in to the unreasonable demands of others. Like I said earlier, they can go to another bakery... why force him to bake cookies? It's always amusing to me that people who say we all should respect others' rights are the same people who have a problem when people exercise their rights if it's something they don't agree with.

You're looking at this from a purely business standpoint. This owner clearly feels strongly about this, that he's willing to "lose business" over it. What if he'd baked the cookies and his business name showed up as a "sponsor" for the event, without his knowledge or approval?  He'd be "promoting" something he believes is wrong. 

He made a business decision, factoring his moral position, the latter being of more importance to him. To take a stand based on God's Word is automatically an offense to many. That's not discrimination, so no need to take it to that level.

The most common preludes to saying something dangerous is "It's just a"

Many Christians don't believe that _Harry Potter_ _is just_ a movie... 





Volver_Alma_Gitana said:


> I guess I want to know how people think they are actually helping the community by refusing service to someone rather than living by example.  Should Congressmen only express christian values?  There's a reason for separation between church and state and I'm glad for it.  There are so many differences within one faith to cause a host of problems if one group feels it needs to dominate the other philosophically.  How one lives their lives is personal.  There's a limit on what can be forced...either way.  I just don't see how he was coming into covenant with a lifestyle he doesn't condone by offering services.  He's not going to have a same-sex experience, he was supposed to bake cookies.  Shrugs.


----------



## joy2day (Oct 3, 2010)

Volver, you may be missing a key point. A GLBT person can walk into a bakery and buy a dozen donuts, cupcakes, cookies, whatever. They specifically asked for a particular order to be made for them, for their "national coming out day." Christians do not support that lifestyle. Don't you see the difference in that? I clearly outlined for you what the rainbow represents for the purposes of Christianity, which is my belief. With all due respect, I am not interested in what the rainbow "universally" means to other groups, I am speaking from the Bible, which is my belief system.

There are other things that I could say here, but I think I have laid out quite sufficiently what I needed to say. But seriously, "civil rights nipped in the bud?" For who? African-Americans? REALLY? Lord, that is whole 'nuther thread, and I can't even go there, I can't, I just can't...

...Come quickly Lord Jesus...


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 3, 2010)

Laela said:


> GV,
> 
> Living by example doesn't equate to giving in to the unreasonable demands of others. Like I said earlier, they can go to another bakery... why force him to bake cookies? It's always amusing to me that people who say we all should respect others' rights are the same people who have a problem when people exercise their rights if it's something they don't agree with.
> 
> ...


 
Actually, I agree with the baker that it's been pushed out of proportion because it's a christian baker and a gay clientele...makes for newsworthy stories.  However, how many other people is he against that he would or would not bake for?  This is truly a lunch-counter situation.  It's not like somebody is asking HIM to be gay and they weren't asking him to make risque' biscuits and whatnot.  To me, that's the swing to the other side of the pendulum.  He disagrees with gay people's lives.  Granted.  But he's not going to provide service to someone because they are different than him.  Christians should not be unequally yoked...could that apply to neighbors of diff. races, faiths or schools, social settings, intermarriages etc.?  What I'm asking is how he thinks he's standing up for Christ by denying them a bunch of cookies?  Believe it or not, Jesus ate with gays.  Are there things specifically mandated in scripture against certain behaviors?  There sure are.  But didn't Jesus even associate with a Samaritan woman?

Disclaimer:  I hope nobody is finding me argumentative because I truly wish to see this from another _credible_ point of view.  As christians, we are to obey the laws of government if they do not go against our mandate to live christian lives.  From what I can see, nobody is forcing this baker to _become_ homosexual (as tho that were possible).  In our country, we do not have the legal right to discriminate religion, sexual orientation, race, nation of origin.  Is this baker going to let those "freedoms" go out the window?  BTW, Harry Potter is so insignificant to me, I , too, believe it's just a movie.    I don't see this issue from the right of him to deny service based upon differences.  Nobody is forcing him to join them in any kind of covenant.


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 3, 2010)

joy2day said:


> Volver, you may be missing a key point. A GLBT person can walk into a bakery and buy a dozen donuts, cupcakes, cookies, whatever. They specifically asked for a particular order to be made for them, for their "national coming out day." *Christians do not support that lifestyle*. *Don't you see the difference in that?* I clearly outlined for you what the rainbow represents for the purposes of Christianity, which is my belief. With all due respect, I am not interested in what the rainbow "universally" means to other groups, *I am speaking from the Bible, which is my belief system.*
> 
> There are other things that I could say here, but I think I have laid out quite sufficiently what I needed to say. But seriously, "civil rights nipped in the bud?" For who? African-Americans? REALLY? Lord, that is whole 'nuther thread, and I can't even go there, I can't, I just can't...
> 
> ...Come quickly Lord Jesus...


 

Civil Rights Movement would have made this country fair for all peoples, even poor whites...that's when he was murdered.  It was going to absolutely transform this place.  Maybe it should be a thread lol.  I'd read it.

Per the other bolded, of course I see your point that christians do not support that lifestyle...but this is not a christian society.  It is made up largely of those under the christian religion but even that is iffy.  The difference I see is that some in the christian community believe they have the right to protest certain lifestyles that are not illegal based upon their set of values and use discriminatory practices to prove the point that their lifestyles are "superior."  In a pluralistic society, that is not allowable.  Not all christians hold to that mentality, tis all.  I can certainly and do certainly respect your opinions.  I'm looking at it from a legal perspective, not purely business.


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 3, 2010)

Volver_Alma_Gitana said:


> John 3:16  "For G-d so loved the world, He gave His only Begotten Son (for the remission of sins)."
> 
> Those sins belong to us all.  I don't agree that he wouldn't bake some cookies for a gay group.  What if a heterosexual group asked him to make breast cookies or penis cookies...what would he say (yes, there are desserts like that)?  He might be opposed but I could see why in that case, esp. with children.  They were only asking for cookies, not directions on how they live their lives and not some that were risque'.
> 
> ...



  Yes, God indeed so loved and loves the world that He gave Jesus, His only begotten Son for the remission of sins.   Which means the Baker has every right and is also commanded in God's Word not to advocate it, which is what the Baker is demonstrating by not baking cookies which support a lifestyle which is sin.  

*
The Baker is not wrong.*  It's no different than being asked to make cookies which advocate lying, stealing, robbing a bank.  These are sins which the Baker cannot advocate.  

The principle here is that the Baker has the right to choose what he supports and what he doesn't and it needs to be respected and not result into bullying and intimidation, that if 'we' don't accept the lifestyle then 'Christians' have 'hell' to pay.   Are_ 'they'_ kidding me?   

The Baker didn't refuse to serve them as a customer, he simply denied being a participant in their event of which he has every single right to.    He wasn't abusing the people or bringing harm to them.  He simply was not an advocate of the agenda they were promoting.  *Period.*

I understand that gays want their lifestyle to be accepted, however it is simply never going to happen and that is a reality in God's mold which can never be rescinded.    God's order will never change just because they want it to so that they can validate their lifestyle.   And it has nothing to do with Constitutional rights, for if they keep 'pushing' this reasoning they are going to have to concede to the fact that to enforce what they call their constitutional rights, that they are indeed violating our constitutional rights regarding our Faith (Religion) as well as hindering / stifling our God given freedom of choice.  

Defending our Christian Rights does not mean gays are not loved and cared for as human beings; we do love gays.   They are in our families, social circles, work places.  In family/friends, we've grown up together, gone to weddings and funerals and care for one another in sickness, financial struggles, and all facets of life, for this is what life is.  However it is the gay lifestyle, not the human being, but the lifestyle which cannot be advocated.   

A mother can love her child and still not advocate sinful behavior.  And to be perfectly honest, a gay family member (or friend) is even *more* loved, for their souls are in jeopardy and the more the sin of homosexuality is pressured into not being a sin, it entraps the person even more in the bondage of it.   Hence the urgency of our battle against it.   It's not about fearing homosexuality or homophobia as the 'fools' use as a weapon, it's about saving the soul of a very dearly loved human being from losing their soul.  

For as God so loves them that He has placed their sin upon the Cross and it has been redeemed, which proves they have not been denied being treated as humans.  God has gone to bat for them, all the way to hell and back, and for all of us.  All we have to do is repent of our sins and *not defend them*, each of us, including gays who are indeed human worthy of love. Their sin is indeed no greater, and therefore it is not exempt from repentance and deliverance as any other sin.

This is shared with a heart of love and not condemnation... :Rose:


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 3, 2010)

Volver_Alma_Gitana said:


> In principle, yes, there absolutely is.  It's called "respect."  I didn't see where they wanted bakery goods that were explicit in design.  You cannot discriminate.  Of course, people will take the other side and say you can't discriminate against a christian's beliefset.  Well, we cannot discriminate against anybody.  Professional judgment is one thing but he's prejudiced.  How is baking an order going against a biblical mandate?  It's not like he's condoning sodomy or something, he's just baking up an order.  He doesn't like gays...we get that.  But is this emotionally based or what?  He might as well put up a sign that says:
> 
> No service to gays
> 
> If he had a sign up, he could and should be sued.  But since he did it underhandedly, he's crying about his religious beliefs in a pluralistic society called the U.S.  I truly don't get it and it has nothing to do with my own life.  Question is, what is the solution?


 
No service to gays ? ? ?    That's not what's this is about.   

I have absolutely no doubt that gay people (especially these in the article) have been in this man's bakery before  .... for 'cookies'.        It was _not a random visit_ to this particular bakery, for they surely would not ask for a special order for such an occasion of such importance to them, without having tasted the bakers products beforehand and know them to be good and of quality.   

All to say that the baker knowing them to be gay had not denied them of any prior service in his bakery.  And I have no doubt that it was obvious that they were gay;  as the majority of gays today make a point of letting the world know who they are, as if they own it.  They didn't hide it when they made the special order request.    Therefore I do not accept the comment that this man hates gays or that he is prejudice against them.  That's an unfair application towards him.   The Baker simply did not wish to provide a service which advocates a lifestyle contrary to his Faith. 

I have family members who curse like a sailor, and/or drink and smoke like a chimney stack and I LOVE them.  However, I do not advocate their cursing, smoking and drinking and I will not support it and *they 'all' know it* and they also know that I love and accept them.    

I simply will not compromise my standards and provide it for them neither will I allow them to bring it into my home, yet they are still 'welcome' into my home *without *the smoking and drinking and the foul language.   They are my family, always; I will love them always, but I do not 'love' what they are doing.      When my son was strung out on drugs, I didn't support the behaviour, but I did however, love and support him as my son. 

It not about hating gays or even being prejudiced against them.  That comment is just an angry retort from the gay community and their supporters.   In many ways, in situations like this, the gay communities reaction is like a baby throwing their baby bottle or toy out of the crib or playpen, because Mommie won't take them out.  However, Mommie is doing what's best for it's time for them to rest.    These retorts are used to try and make Christians appear unloving and as a tactic to compromise God's values. 

And these 'retorts' are actually quite selfish and disrespectful, as gays are really saying, that it's their way or no way.


----------



## LovingLady (Oct 3, 2010)

I didn't read the entire thread but I agree with the baker. The whole situation depends on the subject at hand. If a gay person ordered a cake to celebrate someone's birthday I don't see an issue with that and I am sure they would not be denied service from the baker. This is an issue of helping people celebrate a sinful nature. God said to turn away from sin, in order to fully do that we can't help other people practice it.


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 3, 2010)

I came back to my computer and this message reply was still open...but I posted it.  ???????   Anyhoo, I reposted without realizing....so this one is x-ed out.


----------



## fifi134 (Oct 3, 2010)

Nevermind, see post below.


----------



## fifi134 (Oct 3, 2010)

^^ This doesn't make any sense to me. If something is wrong in man's eyes, I'd be more inclined to perceive it to be wrong in the holy eyes of God. Yes, we may sin and not know what we did was sinful, and therefore be excused from God. But that doesn't mean every sinful act we commit is inexcusable simply because we didn't think it was "wrong". There are some sins that are glaring no-nos as the Bible is outspoken on that. As for the Catholic church, they may not say who sinners are, but the Bible clearly does.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says: 

Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Obviously, the full list of sinners isn't included, but you get the picture. The Bible is clear on its stance against homosexuality, so to say that just because gays may not think what they're doing is wrong, and so are not sinning before God, is wrong, according to Scripture.

Speaking on our consciences, the Bible says in Jeremiah 17:9 that the heart is deceitful above else. I wouldn't dare trust my conscience to determine whether or not I am sinning or not.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 3, 2010)

Volver_Alma_Gitana said:


> I've been reading up a bit on this issue and came across something that might shed light on the other point of view...and it also applies to the baker and those with his belief to not service the organization (of course, I'm not naive...I know they are milking this lol!) and it lies in what one considers wrong and what one considers as sin.  Wrong can be inherently wrong...he better explains it:
> 
> Daniel Helminiak
> " Q:  How could someone do what (the Church says) is wrong and not be living in sin?
> ...



Lawyers ...... this theory sounds like lawyers who twist words and justice like a pretzel. 

Volver, the most important one to listen to is Jesus.  In this situation, what would He do?  

The answer:  The Will of His Heavenly Father.  :Rose:


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 3, 2010)

sopo144 said:


> ^^ This doesn't make any sense to me. If something is wrong in man's eyes, I'd be more inclined to perceive it to be wrong in the holy eyes of God. Yes, we may sin and not know what we did was sinful, and therefore be excused from God. But that doesn't mean every sinful act we commit is inexcusable simply because we didn't think it was "wrong". There are some sins that are glaring no-nos as the Bible is outspoken on that. As for the Catholic church, they may not say who sinners are, but the Bible clearly does.
> 
> 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 says:
> 
> ...


 
Wow ! ! !   

Especially in this day and time when 'wrong' is being taught as right and then backed up by the Constitution.  Children in our schools are being deceived and mislead on the true rights and wrongs of life.... hence their conscience has been predisposed to oppose the Word of God.  

But for the Mercies of God....... God have mercy.  Dear God have mercy.


----------



## Shimmie (Oct 3, 2010)

Abdijz said:


> I didn't read the entire thread but I agree with the baker. The whole situation depends on the subject at hand.
> 
> *
> 
> ...



At the bolded....  

Exactly.     

As I shared in a previous post, I have absolutely *NO* doubt that this baker has provided courteous, respectful and quality service to these very same gays and other gays as well, at other times.   This was not their first time in his bakery and I have no doubt that he knew that they were also gay when he provided a prior service to them. 

The baker was not wrong to decline their request for that particular occasion.


----------



## Laela (Oct 3, 2010)

OK, call me 'deep', but @ the bolded, actually -- they are... by baking those cookies for them, he becomes a supporter, and in turn IS celebrating with them. I don't see how you don't understand that.

That doesn't even fall under the category of meeting people where they are... these aren't folks who trying to live for God and wrestling with sin, they are proud of their sinful lifestyle, and celebrating it.  We all know there are Christians who live sinful lifestyles, and even though they won't 'celebrate' it, they are no different from gays. But I"m sticking with the issue at hand in this case....

The Apostle Paul was all things to all people, yet I doubt he'd dance in the streets with gays today in celebration, to 'prove' he loves anyone. That's not how Love/God operates.




Volver_Alma_Gitana said:


> Actually, I agree with the baker that it's been pushed out of proportion because it's a christian baker and a gay clientele...makes for newsworthy stories.  However, how many other people is he against that he would or would not bake for?  This is truly a lunch-counter situation.  It's not like somebody is asking HIM to be gay and they weren't asking him to make risque' biscuits and whatnot.  To me, that's the swing to the other side of the pendulum.  He disagrees with gay people's lives.  Granted.  But he's not going to provide service to someone because they are different than him.  Christians should not be unequally yoked...could that apply to neighbors of diff. races, faiths or schools, social settings, intermarriages etc.?  What I'm asking is how he thinks he's standing up for Christ by denying them a bunch of cookies?  Believe it or not, Jesus ate with gays.  Are there things specifically mandated in scripture against certain behaviors?  There sure are.  But didn't Jesus even associate with a Samaritan woman?
> 
> Disclaimer:  I hope nobody is finding me argumentative because I truly wish to see this from another _credible_ point of view.  As christians, we are to obey the laws of government if they do not go against our mandate to live christian lives.  From what I can see, nobody is forcing this baker to _become_ homosexual (as tho that were possible).  In our country, we do not have the legal right to discriminate religion, sexual orientation, race, nation of origin.  Is this baker going to let those "freedoms" go out the window?  BTW, Harry Potter is so insignificant to me, I , too, believe it's just a movie.    I don't see this issue from the right of him to deny service based upon differences.  *Nobody is forcing him to join them in any kind of covenant.*


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 4, 2010)

Shimmie said:


> Which means the Baker has every right and is also commanded in God's Word not to advocate it, which is what the Baker is demonstrating by not baking cookies which support a lifestyle which is sin.
> 
> 
> The Baker is not wrong. It's no different than being asked to make cookies which advocate lying, stealing, robbing a bank. These are sins which the Baker cannot advocate.
> ...




I've been reading up a bit on this issue and came across something that might shed light on the other point of view...and it also applies to the baker and those with his belief to not service the organization (of course, I'm not naive...I know they are milking this lol!) and it lies in what one considers wrong and what one considers as sin. Wrong can be inherently wrong...he better explains it:

Daniel Helminiak
" Q: How could someone do what (the Church says) is wrong and not be living in sin?

As the Catholic Church understands it, wrong and sin are not the same thing. Wrong is harm, disorder, destruction; it is in the objective or external world. Sin is self-distancing from God; it is in the heart. Sin is more a general attitude than any particular action. We sin when we deliberately do what we believe is wrong. Then in our hearts we opt for evil. Then we move away from goodness and from God, who is good.

It may well be that what you do is not wrong at all. But if you think it is and you do it anyway, well, you are corrupt. That's sin! Or what you do may really be wrong. But if you don't honestly think so and you do it, well, your heart is not really amiss. You may be uninformed, naive, or stupid, and even dangerous, but unless you have neglected properly informing yourself, you are not sinful.

The Church teaches right and wrong but never says who is a sinner. Only God knows our hearts..."

Sooo, both of them are right lol! One side doesn't wish to distance themselves and deliberately go against what they believe to be the right decision in this matter and the other group or people like me seeing this as discriminatory are concerned with the inherent wrongness of providing service based upon diff. of lifestyle of the client. And with that, both have to do what they believe to be right.  Because, ultimately, it can come down to non-christians discriminating against the faithful for their belief system.  Just today, the homily was on respect for human rights.  I can clearly see both sides of the issue.  I'm just concerned that he's picking and choosing the "sin."  

Shimmie, Laela, you know I'm listening to your views! It's just got to be credible for me to even fathom supporting it...because at first, it just seemed so "out there." It's illegal.  If he's going (imho) to deny this rainbow cookie, he should deny service to all known-gays. 

 I'm glad for the input and this is an excellent thread because it deals with the hard stuff, pragmatism and how we all view this faith and put it to work.  It's difficult.  I personally don't like to see a precedent set for discrimination of any type not only because it could backfire unfavorably to any faith community but that it's inherently erroneous imho.  

But....this is also a question I'd like to ask since the majority consensus is that the baker is right.  Would people and do people (christians) condone gays teaching their children or performing medical services of a sensitive nature...such as proctologists, gynecologists?  Even if they knew their kids' teacher, doctor, lawyer etc. were actively open in supporting the gay lifestyle?  Do you pick and choose who can handle your consumer needs and do you pick and choose who you will service when they seek goods and services?


----------



## Laela (Oct 4, 2010)

^^ It's all good, GV, because there is merit in this post .. that only God knows the heart. He really does...  That's why I believe we'll all be surprised in the end, including me.  Since we (the Church) use the Word of God as the standard, toes will get stepped on and offense will come when we measure against it. God's Word is black and white..That's the bigger picture... what we're discussing is the gray..

OK but to answer your question... It's unfair to compare a teacher, doctor or any other professional who happens to be gay doing their job, to a group of gays asking me to help them celebrate. Love the person, hate the sin.  So no, I won't have a problem with a gay teacher teaching my child the curriculum...   Anything outside of that is another story. For ex, if he asks me for permission to allow my child to participate in a gay-themed production..that's where I'd have something to say. Uhhh, NAW!  As a parent, I have that right. So does the baker, he's objecting an act, not the people. I'd bet he has always served anyone who enter his store, whether they are gay or not... we're talking about a special order, for a specific event.


----------



## FoxxyLocs (Oct 4, 2010)

So if you think what you are doing is ok, its not a sin? Even if God has clearly said not to do it?


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 4, 2010)

Full volition...there's a difference between what is inherently, externally wrong and sin because the latter is purposeful distancing from G-d.  There is a point when one believes something to be sinful (we're not talking about murder or robbery lol) and from that point, he's held accountable.  You have full knowledge that not only is it wrong, but in doing so, you are purposefully distancing yourself from G-d.  That's the difference.    And I also believe that there are some wrongs that are automatically known as sin to us ...law written on the heart.  That crosses all cultures.

Incidentally, G-d tells us what is wrong so we can stay free from harm.  When we fully comprehend something or fully believe it to be wrong and do so in our free will as a turning away from G-d, then it is sin.


----------



## FoxxyLocs (Oct 5, 2010)

Does the scripture support your position? If so could you post where you are getting this from?


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 5, 2010)

The cathechism, based upon scripture and tradition, which is what the apostles down onwards taught and continue to teach today.  I'll have to say it again, not all christians are the same here.  You have methodists, episcopalians, baptists, catholics, orthodox, pentecostals, evangelicals...etc. 

Catechism of the Catholic Church - Sin (IV)

I'm only providing since you asked...I don't proselytize and don't ever want to.  But to provide an explanation ...that's where I get it from.  I respect all opinions...I just might not agree with them...and there are those who don't agree with mine...I'm kewl with that.  For reference pertaining to my post only.  But I don't want you to think I'm giving the definitive response...it's not.  We're all giving our sides of the issue, backed by scripture in discussion form.  :wink2:


----------



## HeChangedMyName (Oct 11, 2010)

As a Christian, I wouldn't have filled the cookie order either.  Simply because I believe it is a sinful lifestyle.  I also wouldn't be making any penis or vagina cookies.  

You ladies have posted soem really great scriptures.

The one I'd like to post is that Mark 12:31 "The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'[a]There is no commandment greater than these."

Love doesn't mean bowing down and wallowing in a person's sinful habit with them, it means standing up to their sins and still expressing love.


----------



## Guitarhero (Oct 11, 2010)

I probably need to reiterate because I'm not interested in swaying anybody to any side and I fully comprehend your viewpoint.  But I also realize, painfully so, the many who believe that we are in error.  Incidentally, the same viewpoint you hold could be pointed in the direction of those who broke from tradition and the original church.  I'm not saying that...but we should all realize that no matter how we view our sides, there will always be disagreements with someone.  We should just learn how to get around those without condemning others as having untruths, always looking to the One who know it all...  It's Him to whom we all owe allegiance.

I'm only providing since you asked...I don't proselytize and don't ever want to. But to provide an explanation ...that's where I get it from. I respect all opinions...I just might not agree with them...and there are those who don't agree with mine...I'm kewl with that.  For reference pertaining to my post only. *But I don't want you to think I'm giving the definitive response.*..it's not. *We're all giving our sides of the issue, backed by scripture in discussion form. *


----------

