Kentucky Commission Orders Christian Company to Print Pro-Homosexual T-Shirts

Hands OnLEXINGTON, Ky. — A Kentucky Human Rights Commission examiner has ordered a Christian screen printing company to print t-shirts that bear pro-homosexual messages and undergo diversity training for declining to make shirts for a “gay pride” celebration two years ago.

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission issued the recommendations of its hearing examiner on Tuesday, declaring that Hands On Originals–a company that identifies as “Christian outfitters” on the home page of its website–violated the Lexington Fairness Ordinance by passing on the requested order because of its religious convictions.

The Gay and Lesbian Services Organization of Lexington (GLSO) had wanted the company to print t-shirts for the 2012 Lexington Gay Pride Festival. When manager Blaine Adamson declined the order due to the company’s biblical convictions not to be partaker of another man’s sins (1 Timothy 5:22, Ephesians 5:7), GLSO filed a complaint with the HRC.

“I want the truth to come out—it’s not that we have a sign on the front door that says, ‘No Gays Allowed,’” owner Blaine Adamson said following the filing of the complaint. “We’ll work with anybody. But if there’s a specific message that conflicts with my convictions, then I can’t promote that.”

But HRC examiner Greg Munson ruled this week that Hands On Originals violated the law by not printing the shirts for the event.

“The evidence of record shows that the respondent discriminated against GLSO because of its members’ actual or imputed sexual orientation by refusing to print and sell to them the official shirts for the 2012 Lexington Pride Festival,” he wrote.

During a hearing regarding the matter this past June, GSLO representative Aaron Baker admitted to the commission that his desire to force Christians to print pro-homosexual messages works both ways, and that the homosexual companies could be forced to print messages for the Westboro Baptist “Church.”

  • Connect with Christian News

 

“I believe that a gay printer would have to print a t-shirt for the Westboro Baptist Church,” he stated, referring to the controversial organization whose messages express a desire for Americans to burn in Hell rather than be saved. “And if the Westboro Baptist Church were to say, ‘Look, we’re a church; we’re promoting our church values by having our name on a T-shirt,’ I don’t see how you could refuse that.”

But Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), the Christian legal group assisting Hands On Originals, as well as local attorneys Sturgill, Turner, Barker & Moloney, PLLC, of Lexington, said that no one should be forced to print messages that violate their convictions.

“No one wants to live in that kind of America—a place where people who identify as homosexual are forced to promote the Westboro Baptists and where printers with sincere religious convictions are forced to promote the message of the GLSO,” said Hands On Originals’ co-counsel Bryan Beauman. “In America, we don’t force people to express messages that are contrary to their convictions.”

“No one should be forced by the government—or by another citizen—to endorse or promote ideas with which they disagree,” agreed ADF Senior Legal Counsel Jim Campbell. “Blaine declined the request to print the shirts not because of any characteristic of the people who asked for them, but because of the message that the shirts would communicate.”

In his decision, Munson ruled that Hands On Originals must accept orders to print t-shirts or other products that bear messages advocating for homosexuality, and mandated the company to undergo diversity training.

“The respondent is permanently enjoined from discriminating against individuals because of their actual or imputed sexual orientation or gender identity,” he wrote. “The respondent is ordered to participate in diversity training to be conducted by the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission within 12 months of the issuance of this order.”

Jim Campbell SOT: Baker v. Hands On Originals from ADF Media Relations on Vimeo.

A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • bowie1

    What good would diversity training do since the owner would still have the same beliefs afterward? I don’t imagine they would waterboard the “offender” or use sleep deprivation.

    • [email protected]

      Think about it – this alleged ‘diversity training’, if successful would reduce diversity in thought and belief!

  • Evolution is a fact

    Wow. I’m an atheist and I think this ruling is absurd. Whatever happened to the right to refuse service?

    • Bolvon72

      In Kentucky it is illegal to refuse service based on sexual orientation. I think that the group went to these printers as a statement, and should know better by now that the press only benefits the business. None-the-less, the commission was only following state law.

      • Evolution is a fact

        True. Admittedly, I struggle with these kinds of things. On the one hand, I don’t like small businesses being forced to do things that conflict with their religious beliefs, but on the other hand, I don’t want a society that allows businesses to discriminate. I try to take it case by case, but it’s not always easy to reconcile the conflict.

        • GinnyLee

          It is not ‘easy’, because the government has given itself the authority to cause confusion and the destruction of private business. If I don’t like a certain ‘taste’ or theory of a business, I don’t go there. I trade with people whom I like.

          The ‘choice’ should not go wholly to the buyer. Sellers have choices, too. And this is the American way. Or, should be.

          If a business is so ‘wrong’ in being selective, the market will take care of it. It should NOT be regulated by a few government peons – looking for a reason to write another ‘law’.

      • jmichael39

        from what I gathered, they didn’t refuse service because the clients were gay. They refused because the message violated their standards for business. That is not against the law. If that were against the law then, for example, some porn company could sue this company for refusing to print a drawing of a woman giving a man oral sex on the front a bunch of t-shirts.

        • SashaC

          What exactly are their standards for business? You can twist it and word it as creatively as you like, but it was against the law, according to the court system. This is the same thing as if a gay run screen printing shop refused to print pro-Christian shirts. It’s discriminatory and they would be subject to to the same penalties.

          • jmichael39

            Just as you can twist and turn their rejection of doing certain types of business as being bigoted. They say right on their website they print Christian-based t-shirts. Are you REALLY that surprised that they would choose to not print t-shirts that violated their Christian beliefs? Would it matter if they refused to print the same t-shirts if the order came from a NON-homosexual? That’s the fundamental question which no one is addressing…except the plaintiff. Are they rejecting this business because of the message on the t-shirt or because of the sexual orientation of the customer. If they would not reject the order from a homosexual that wanted t-shirts printed with something that did not violate their Christian beliefs….OR…if they would still reject the order even if placed by someone who is not a homosexual….then the premise that these people violated the Kentucky statute is refuted.

          • jmichael39

            So I ask these fundamental questions to all of you…
            1) if this business rejected the same order if the order was placed by non-homosexuals…would they, in your mind, be still violating the Kentucky statute? If so, why?

            2) if this business willingly did business with other homosexuals in the past who had placed orders for t-shirts that did not carry a message that ‘violated’ their Christian beliefs, would that be sufficient evidence that they were rejecting this specific order based upon the message and not based upon the sexual orientation of the customers?

          • SashaC

            1) Yes, they would still be violating the statute. The actual customer does not have to be gay. They are still discriminating against gays. If I as a straight person went in to have shirts printed for a gay event I supported and they refused, they are still discriminating against me based on their assumption that I am part of a class that is protected. They are still discriminating against gays because they will not make them shirts. Discrimination is discrimination, whether they assume accurately or not. The issue is their reasoning and intent.

            2) No, because how would they know they were doing business with homosexuals in the past? It could be argued that they only had an issue once they found out the customer was gay. Even if they did know, let’s look at the precedence set in the case of the bakery, Sweet Cakes by Melissa. They refused to make the wedding cake of a lesbian couple who were regular customers of theirs. They had served them in the past, but refused to do the cake because it was specifically for a gay wedding. They are currently looking to appeal a $150,000 fine for their discrimination.

          • KenS

            Hello, you are missing the point, it can not be discrimination, when they are asking for a service this company does not normally provide. This company’s product is christian based messages on clothing, signs etc… This would be no different than s

          • SashaC

            You have posted the same comment 3 times. I just addressed you on the first one. They offer screen printing SERVICES. This is different than offering pre made goods. If a Christian bookstore offered the service of printing books of your choice or design, as the screen printing shop in question does, they would have to print secular books as well. Though they could have a policy against pornography, as long as that applies to all pornography equally.

          • KenS

            No, you are wrong, the article and their website, clearly state that they offer christian messages on their screen-printing service, which again is no different than your vegetarian menu anaolgy

          • SashaC

            I’m sorry if you’re not grasping the difference. I’ve tried to explain it as simply as possible. If I was wrong and you were right, we wouldn’t be having this discussion and this article would not exist, because the courts would have found in the screen printer’s favor.

          • jmichael39

            “You have posted the same comment 3 times. I just addressed you on the first one. They offer screen printing SERVICES. This is different than offering pre made goods. If a Christian bookstore offered the service of printing books of your choice or design, as the screen printing shop in question does, they would have to print secular books as well. Though they could have a policy against pornography, as long as that applies to all pornography equally. ” – With all due respect, that’s an absurd argument. You’re delineating between products sold off the shelf and products produced? Are you serious? So if I own a Christian based video production company and a porn producer comes in and requests my services to film a porn movie, I’m not allowed to reject that business? Or is it only discrimination if the porn produce is a woman or a minority or gay because those are “protected classes”?

          • SashaC

            I’m delineating between goods and services. Sorry if thats beyond the scope of your comprehension. Others have already used the porn angle. Read the rest of my comments. I can’t keep addressing the same point over and over again. I’m done here.

          • jmichael39

            “Yes, they would still be violating the statute. The actual customer does not have to be gay. They are still discriminating against gays. ” – is that your opinion or is that what the statute says? If so, please provide the citation from the law.

            “they are still discriminating against me based on their assumption that I am part of a class that is protected.” – In a court of law, a person cannot be convicted based upon an “assumption”…in fact, the law…our laws…require an ‘assumption’ of innocence. So you argument here is clearly not based upon law…at least in regards to my specific question.

            The influencing factor in proving discrimination legally would require that there be evidence that the discrimination was against the PERSON….because of race, creed, sex, sexual orientation, etc. That’s why I also asked the second question. And thus your answer to both questions leave a deep hole in your argument.

            You ASSUME that the business owners ASSUMED that the customers were gay because of the message they were asking to be printed on the t-shirts. That is admissible in court without corroborating evidence to show the assumption is a reasonable one to make. By your own admission, there is no such corroborating evidence. All we have here is the following information:

            1) the customers requested a specific message on the t-shirts that happen to promote a gay pride parade.

            2) the store owners rejected the business.

            3) the store owners say they rejected it because of the message itself. Not because of the customers.

            4) no one has presented a shred of evidence to suggest that the store owners are lying.
            5) no one has presented any evidence that the store owners have ever rejected a customer because of THEIR race, creed, sex, sexual orientation, etc.

            So frankly, all you have is your assumptions…which even more frankly, appear prejudiced simply because they are not based upon facts…but purely upon assumptions.

            Which leads me to a third question. If these business owners rejected the business of a customer asking them to print a pro-abortion message on t-shirts…because of their religious beliefs that abortion is murder…would you consider that to be discrimination? If so, then you by sheer logic, would be required to accept their reasons for not wanting to print these gay pride t-shirts for the same reason. If not, then you have to explain why.

            As an alternative example…let’s say that two African American customers came in wanting to have them print t-shirts that carried some sort of message to the effect of “kill white scum” or something like that. Would it be discriminatory for the store owners to reject their business on the basis that the message violates their religious beliefs against bigotry and hatred…simply because they are black and part of a “protected class”?

          • SashaC

            I skimmed your wall of text. My comments are all over this comments section, and as far as I can tell I have addressed all of your points. Go read them.

          • SashaC

            I have addressed you below.

          • rebekah26

            So, what if the gay company was asked to print, “FAGS go to hell”? Would that be ok for them to refuse?
            That is not a Christian held belief by the way, but unfortunately the Westboro Baptist Church makes the rest of us look bad.

          • SashaC

            Yes, they could probably refuse that. Any print shop will have guidelines as to what they will and will not print, in regards to obscenity. The trick is that they must stick to those guidelines for everyone. So if a gay shop sets a precedence by refusing to print “WE HATE FAGS,” they shouldn’t be willing to print “WE HATE CHRISTIANS.” That would be discrimination. But if they don’t print hate speech for anyone, they are in the clear.

            In this case the customer did not ask for anything offensive that the shop refuses to print for anyone. Let’s take your example of “FAGS GO TO HELL.” The gay customer didn’t ask for shirts that say, “DIE CHRISTIAN A$$HOLES.” See where the issue lies? They just wanted regular shirts advertising their rally.

            Please understand that if a Christian went into a gay run shop and requested shirts for a Christian rally that did not go against the general, legal (in other words, not discriminating based on a protected class) guidelines of what the shop prints, I believe that the gay run shop should also be punished to the full extent of the law. Rules are different for businesses than they are for individuals. People need to understand that or they need not open a business.

            Honestly, my post is oversimplified, to a degree. But this issue is complicated.

          • KenS

            I’m sorry but the discrimination laws apply to services that are offered to the general public. This company is a christian outfitter, therefore it only offers christian products which allows it to deny any product that is not christian….in other words it is not denying a product that it normally sells in this instance.

          • SashaC

            I have already addressed this, so I will cut and paste my reply to someone who asked me to look at their website…

            I went to the site and I can understand where you’re coming from. Here’s the issue though. The company offers custom printing services of a design of your choosing or or one you’ve created. It’s right there on the site. If they want to avoid this issue in the future, they need to stop offering those services and sell pre made goods only. Problem solved.

            Let’s use the bookstore analogy, but flip it. Say a gay person has a bookstore where they only sell gay literature, but they also offer a service where you can choose or write a book and they will print it. If you go in asking for a bible to be custom printed, they are obligated to do so, or they will have discriminated. They offer a service and must provide it in adherence with the law. However, if they don’t offer printing services and only sell pre made goods with a gay theme, you have no right to request a bible.

            Also keep in mind that a company cannot be Christian. The owners can be Christian, but a business is not a person and has no religious rights. Just like a store can’t be gay, it can have gay owners.

          • KenS

            again, your vegetarian menu/service applys here as well

          • SashaC

            *sigh* No it doesn’t and I’ve explained why numerous times. I’m sorry if you can’t comprehend it. If you were right, the courts wouldn’t have found against the screen printing company.

          • jmichael39

            LMAO…like I said before, give it up, guys, Sasha’s not about EQUAL rights…she’s about SPECIAL rights for “protected classes”. There is no reasoning with a person who can’t remotely think logically. She’s long since decided that certain classes of people deserve priority in the arguments over rights…so there’s no use arguing with that form of logic. Its like trying to put a grease fire out with lead paint.

          • Pax Humana

            I do not give it up, for when someone attacks me, I am like a pit bull at a chew toy in response to people like her, sir.

          • jmichael39

            go for it, friend.

          • Pax Humana

            You do not want equal rights, you want “separate but equal rights” in this country, just like the slave owners/masters/mistresses/drivers of old, and the last time that I checked, the concept of “separate but equal” was ruled as being AGAINST the Constitution of the United States, SashaC! Furthermore, here are some words that might shock you! Did you know that, prior to it being shut down in 2008, the Intersex Society of North America had a quote that they were special people that were superior to the heterosexual people? Do you know what that sounds like, miss? This quote sounds EXACTLY like the “Master Race” philosophy of Nazi Germany and similar other movements in other Socialist, as well as Communist, Fascist, and Nationalist nations. Furthermore, the OTHER parts of the LGBT movement also have similar creeds that they promote against heterosexuals AND not only do they do that to them, but that they also do that against EACH OTHER, thus they are essentially beginning to turn on one another for their wicked behavior in their lives, just like zombies that are running out of fresh bodies to infect and just like a cancerous tumor that is running out of healthy cells to attack inside the body. The REAL reasons, other than saving people from an eternal fate that is, quite literally, worse than death, for going against the LGBT community, is not only to preserve the way of life that YAHWEH EL ELOHIM told us to live, but to ALSO prevent the various factions of the LGBT movement from turning on one another and thus creating war within their own ranks. Wow, who would have thought of doing THAT in your communities, am I right?

          • SashaC

            I’m gonna need a tl/dr for this. I can’t bring myself to read your never ending ramblings.

          • Pax Humana

            Good, then that must mean that your lone, undersized, under-performing, under-powered, malformed, incompetent, incontinent, impotent, sub-atomic, and sub-protozoan brain cell from the Borg hive mind that you and a few other trolls and attention whores that are on this page all share is unable to figure out the truth of the matter…the Holy Scriptures said that this was always true of you Lucifer worshiping types anyway.

          • SashaC

            Lol! You’re adorable. Borg hive mind…too much! Smh

          • Pax Humana

            Yes, your lack of real intelligence and common sense IS indeed adorable, is it not, SashaC(ommunist), you dimwitted troll?

          • SashaC

            Surely with your superior intelligence you can do better than that! Keep it coming, honey. The angrier you get and the more names you call me, the more I laugh and know I’ve won. 😉

          • Pax Humana

            You lost when you met me, SashaC(ommunist). Furthermore, YOU are the angry one because I decided to play you at your own game. I can see it in your eyes, miss.

          • SashaC

            Yes, I’m so angry. Isn’t it obvious? Lol! You have run out of insults, apparently. I thought you had promise, but I overestimated you. This was fun, but I grow bored with you. Consider yourself dismissed. Kisses!

          • Pax Humana

            No, I have not run out of insults, SashaC(ommunist), for as long as you are still alive, I will have the satisfaction of knowing that you are indeed one to the human race as well as a bad running gag. I have lots of promise, but you only have lots of criminal activities that disguise themselves as promises that you can not keep in your life. You are only growing bored with me because you know that you are losing your cool, thus proving what I said was right all along, namely, that it is YOU that is the angry one. Furthermore, only spoiled brats like yourself like to start fights that they know that they can not win, and then they act like the LGBT trolls that got all butt hurt because the Christians told them no and to go take a hike. Seriously, in a battle of wits, you are clearly unarmed.

          • Pax Humana

            No, consider yourself a kitchen bitch and YOUR argument lost, okay, SashaC(ommunist)? Thank you and have a nice life.

          • SashaC

            Ahhhaahha, you poor thing! Don’t have a stroke!

          • The Last Trump

            Hey there! I see you’re out making friends again! Well, I won’t bother to comment on this. Looks like you’ve already got your hands full. Seriously though, why are you constantly in the Christian News and like publications? Into self punishment? Addicted to arguing? I don’t get it. Myself and the vast majority of the others on these sites would have absolutely no interest whatsoever in scanning through the comment sections of The Gay Times looking for people to fight with or rain on your “parade”. What gives?

          • Pax Humana

            You can laugh and then you can excite your heart rate until you die and when you die, then you will know the reality of Sheol (Hell) all too well as you will be a helpless little bitch of Lucifer when YAHWEH EL ELOHIM makes His Final Judgment upon humankind and you are found lacking and that you are unable to say a word in response to your eternal fate, thus I win and not your sorry arrogant ass!

          • SashaC

            YESSSS! I can just feel the butthurt flowing through you! Your rage and indignation is what I feed off of, lol! Three days later, you’re STILL irate. I love it! I’m not sure how you could be dumb enough to keep playing into my hands, but thank you!

            Serious question…is Lucifer like the devil in the movie Legend, cuz he was hot! Hail sexy Lucifer! 😉

          • Pax Humana

            Aw, good, you are typing…I can do that as well, SashaC(ommunist), and I can type again, and again, and again, and keep interrupting your train of lack of thought in your life.

          • Pax Humana

            How about you need something else, namely, that you need to get into the kitchen and start to making some sandwiches?

          • http://www.blogtalkradio.com/faithwalkamerica Jason Hawes

            And our court system always rules justly and without bias or politics involved. Bottom line is people, ANY people, but it would seem to be these days gay activist people, need to stop targeting businesses that they know or at least strongly suspect will not meet their requests for reasons of personal belief. If WE actually followed the constitution and the original intent of the founding fathers WE, including the courts, would recognize that above almost literally all things a person’s right to religious conscience is something government doesn’t intrude upon. Even short of that, if again WE would GROW UP and stop being so “butt hurt” over every little offense and become determined to destroy someone’s livelihood, sue them, or make the government punish them, the whole country would be a lot better off. Someone doesn’t want to print your tshirts for you? Fine- someone else is willing to if you look hard enough. Take your business elsewhere. Even gay activists like Andrew Sullivan recognize this and pretty much admit that an intrusion upon freedom is an intrusion upon freedom.

          • SashaC

            I completely agree. YOU should GROW UP and stop being so “butt hurt” because gays expect to be treated equally and are willing to call you out legally when you discriminate. What fantasy world do you live in, where people who break the law should be able to get away with it and be left alone because it’s “not nice” to call them out and hold them accountable? Not very American of you. The founding fathers would be ashamed.

          • http://www.blogtalkradio.com/faithwalkamerica Jason Hawes

            The founding fathers would be spinning in their graves at the very idea of “gay marriage”. George Washington forbade homosexuals in the military. Stop distorting things and resorting to emotional bleeding heart nonsense. While you’re at, it wouldn’t hurt to open your eyes and realize what the gay ACTIVISTS are doing in this country and what their agenda is. Government ordered “sensitivity training” should make ANY American with the slightest notion of history cringe.

          • SashaC

            Better a bleeding heart than none at all.

            George Washington had slaves too, what’s your point?

            The argument that the founding fathers would be spinning in there graves is old and tired. It’s the go-to whiny statement of traditionalists, every time there’s progress made in this country. I’m sure it was used when slavery was abolished, African Americans were given the right to vote, women were given the right to vote, segregation ended, interracial couples were allowed to marry, etc. It’s a deeply flawed argument. Are we forever supposed to live as they did? Of course not. We move forward, with or without your approval.

          • http://www.blogtalkradio.com/faithwalkamerica Jason Hawes

            You know Sasha, it’s good to see that you’re such a final example of a “loving, tolerant” person that you no doubt would present yourself as when you imply that to disagree with or be on the opposite side of your position is to not have a heart. Gotta love “the love”.

            Anyway, you’re the one who referenced that the founding fathers would be ashamed of my standing for speech and religious rights in light of this issue. I simply stated that actually history would probably show that’s not the case. Now you want to stand on both sides of the issue, saying how “ashamed they would be of me” and how “unamerican I am” in one breath while dismissing and discounting them in the next. And I’ve got “history news” for you again. Yes, George Washington owned slaves. But there was a movement among several of the founding fathers and people of their day, mostly the ones behind the pulpit, of the need to do away with slavery. I’m very comfortable with where I stand and where many who would have believed as I did stood, many times even leading the way on most if not all the issues you mentioned.

            I’m not so arrogant or possessed of such a sense of self importance that I expect that my “approval” means anything. But I do have a right, just as you have a right, to comment and make my stances on the issues of the day known. And I’m sorry, but I don’t see a nation or a culture in which we start to say, “We’ll decide what’s moral and acceptable in many areas as we go along and just kind of wing it based on the mood of the day” as a good thing. You may be an atheist, and while I of course don’t agree with that, that’s your right. But Christianity in one way or another has certainly served as a bedrock in this country. It’s also served as the hallmark, in spirit, of the freedoms in this country. And bit by bit, as that’s chipped away, as that’s marginalized, as that’s forced out of the public spectrum or placed on the backburner for causes such as “tolerance for one’s sexual preferences and orientation”, with government growing bigger and becoming the punisher of dissidents to that cause, and to all such causes- government grows bigger- liberties grow smaller- and the government becomes the “god” of the state- the giver and bestower of “blessings” and caretaker of our needs.

            Why should a Christian, or even ANY individual, sacrifice their constitutional rights so that the politically correct meme of the day be served?

          • Jeff Levy

            {{“Christianity in one way or another has certainly served as a bedrock in
            this country. It’s also served as the hallmark, in spirit, of the
            freedoms in this country. And bit by bit, as that’s chipped away, as
            that’s marginalized, as that’s forced out of the public spectrum or
            placed on the backburner for causes such as “tolerance for one’s sexual
            preferences and orientation”, with government growing bigger and
            becoming the punisher of dissidents to that cause, and to all such
            causes- government grows bigger- liberties grow smaller- and the
            government becomes the “god” of the state- the giver and bestower of
            “blessings” and caretaker of our needs.”}}

            Would that be Like;
            Christianity Slaughtering the Natives of that is now the USA??
            OR
            the Burning of Live Human Beings because these Christians felt so & so was a Witch ??
            OR
            that Left handed People were demon possessed Along with any Handicap person??
            OR
            The cruelty they did to other races (the Chinese, Irish, ect)
            OR
            Blacks had been cursed So they was ok to be Slaves for Christians??
            OR
            Christians didn’t want their White Kids having to be in the same School as a Black Kid..
            OR
            Blacks couldn’t set where they wanted to on a Bus or in a restaurant??
            OR
            That Black Blood was poisoned??
            OR
            Christians didn’t want Women or Blacks to Vote…
            OR
            Christians didn’t want Women to own property SHE was the MAN’S Property….
            WE can go even further back into History of the cruel Christianity did to others
            {willfully causing pain or suffering to others, or feeling no concern about it.}

            {{the
            freedoms in this country. And bit by bit, as that’s chipped away,}}
            No the ONLY thing being Chipped away is Christians think they have a right to take rights or prevent rights of others…

            Christians are NOT being Persecuted in the USA they are the one that have been and doing the Persecuting of others…

            It’s simple if one is a Christians and wants to open a Business FALLOW the LAW and one won’t be sued for Discrimination..

            This Country goes by the US Constitution NOT the Christian Bible or any other Religious Bible…

            Have A Gay Day…

          • Pax Humana

            You can take your day and shove it up your rectum like a dildo, Jeff Levy! Furthermore, just because you have a Jewish last name does NOT save you from the wrath of YAHWEH EL ELOHIM for this sort of behavior in your life. Furthermore, the government of this country, despite being wrong in a lot of instances when it came to the treatment of the so-called “First Nations” people (and I myself am a descendent of two still surviving groups of such people myself), they were also likewise not the ONLY people that did the deed to them, as many, if not ALL, of those people were often at war with one another AND that had ALSO enslaved and slaughtered other nations LONG before people came to this country from other nations. Were THAT not enough, the so-called “First Nations” people ALSO took slaves from other countries that were outside of this country and had also owned them in their lives. I will also add that the first slave owner in this country was actually NOT a person that was of the so-called “white race,” but, rather, they were of the so-called “black race,” AND that both slaves AND slave owners/masters/mistresses/drivers were of ALL different skin, hair, and eye colors as well as one or more so-called “ethnic backgrounds” AND “ethnicities!” Wow, that must really blow your libtard mind, am I right? Furthermore, people in OTHER countries, particularly European, African, and Asian countries, enslaved, fought in wars, and slaughtered rival people not only within their own nations, empires, and the like, but they also did the same thing with OTHER nations, empires, and the like throughout their existence! This is nothing new and, granted, slavery is wrong, but the LGBT community is one of the BIGGEST slave owner/master/mistress/driver groups in this country, if not the world, and it is WAY past time to outlaw their enslavement and destruction of the human race, period, full stop!

          • Eggshan

            “everytime there’s progress made”? Pick up a history book young lady, what you perverts are up to is NOTHING new, you’re just the latest ones to try to it.

          • SashaC

            Yes, progress. I even included a list, what’s so hard to comprehend? Do you not consider the events I listed progress?

            There’s nothing perverted about it. If you don’t like it, don’t do it. It’s that simple. No one is forcing gay sex upon you. And by the way, not all of us who support gay rights are gay. The fact that you think so says a lot about you.

          • Pax Humana

            Speaking of no hearts, yours is a black hole, SashaC, and ditto for the rest of the LGBT community, period, full stop.

          • SashaC

            Cool story, bro. 😉

          • Pax Humana

            Yeah, but it is also a true one, miss. Please get your sexist, intolerant, hate mongering, judgmental, intolerant, narrow-minded, prejudicial, discriminatory, misandrist, immature, hypocritical, narcissistic, egotistical, arrogant, prideful, and elitist self into where you belong, namely a kitchen, then go back to your PROPER deprogramming sessions, and THEN come back to me when you REALLY grow up, okay? Thank you and have a nice day, you Lucifer worshiping, attention whoring little troll.

          • SashaC

            Awww! You left “Borg hive mind” out of this one! That’s my favorite! Getting upset aren’t you? Foaming at the mouth a bit, eh? I always consider it a win when you people become apoplectic, losing your tiny little minds. Thanks, I love this.

          • Pax Humana

            Yes, your mind is indeed tiny, SashaC(ommunist). Furthermore, I know that you are the one that is foaming at the mouth to do things like gulags, re-education centers, workers’ internment camps, and concentration camps again. The reality is that people like you NEVER win in human history. People like you always die and you only become legends in your own minds whereas in the case of the rest of the world, the only thing that is legendary is your sheer stupidity. I guess that the cities of Sodom, Gomorrah, Adnah, Zebulon, and Zeboiim were not big enough lessons to get through your thick skull, am I right?

          • James Grimes

            The men who once made this country great would never approve of the immorality that is being passed off as “equal rights” today. We are no longer an ethical society. Our mores today are in the gutter. The gutter – trash militants are to be condemned and not held up as those who should be admired. I pity the young people today who will inherit this mess.

          • http://EdenPoliticalCartoons.com/ David John Eden

            Really? The founding fathers would be turning over in their graves to see how the freedoms they fought for & forged are being manipulated by such sexual anarchists like you. Do you really believe they died for liberty for all races, classes, religions and …um… sexual orientations, deviations & perversions? For equality of opportunity & respect? YES! But not for special sexual privileges, not for societal takeover, and never never for holy matrimony!

          • Monique Reynolds-Palmer

            But why would a Christian company solicit services of a gay company Sasha? I as a Christian, don’t go around asking if a company participates in or supports homosexuals, however, if I know that a company supports something or participates in something I believe in – I would steer clear. In my humble opinion, I think homosexuals/supporters of homosexuals negate their argument when (you all) go to Christian business/events/blogs pushing your agenda and willfully agitate Christians.

            Furthermore, in my opinion, homosexuality is a choice. Having sex period is A CHOICE. Who, with what, why and how you have sex is A CHOICE – being black or of African descent is not. As a BLACK AMERICAN WOMAN I personally think it is disrespectful, selfish, parasitic and hateful to compare the plight of homosexuals to that of those of us who have had to endure racism. There is 400 years (and counting) of imperical

          • SashaC

            For the same reasons anyone would select a business to solicit. Perhaps they are known for doing good work. Perhaps their prices are better. No one should have to worry that they may be turned away from giving their business to someone. A gay person shouldn’t have to call around and ask if a business will accept their patronage. It’s ridiculous.

            If you think I’m going to give you leeway because you are a black American and your people struggled, you are sadly mistaken. Quite the opposite. You should understand even more. I have also dealt with racism, which makes me even more sympathetic to discrimination. Being gay is not a choice. Why would anyone choose to live a life where people like you see them as being subhuman and discriminate against them? That’s insane. Yes, you can choose who you have sex with. But this is not about sex alone. Do you not understand that? Are you relationships with men solely about sex? No, there is love and attraction involved. It’s the same way with ALL humans, including gays. They can force themselves to have sex with the opposite gender, but they will

          • SashaC

            Love the opposite gender. And everyone deserves to love.

            (Sorry. Screen froze and wouldn’t let me finish in one comment.)

          • Pax Humana

            These people WILL learn to love the opposite gender in their lives. What is needed for them is the same thing as a drunk needs that wants to get rid of alcohol, a drug user needs to stay clean, or any other addict to get away from the source of addiction in their lives. The people that promote this form of hate speech known as heterophobia (homosexuality), and its related ilk, will thrive if they are kept in isolation from other heterophobes (homosexuals) AND if they are counseled by people of the opposite gender, just like cutting out drunks and sources of alcohol work for drunks, and with cutting out contact with drug users and drugs works for recovering drug users, then they will no longer have their lives polluted by the sources of enabling their deviant, wicked, evil, vile, sick, and perverted behavior in their lives, period, full stop. Bisexual, transgendered, transsexual, dysmorphic body disorder, dissociative gender disorder, gender identity disorder, and intersex people can also be cured in the same manner and anyone that says otherwise is simply an attention whore, a troll, and a sick con artist that is preying upon other humans and their weaknesses just to make a quick buck and to use someone like a person drinking a soft drink can or bottle and then throwing them away when they are an empty husk of what they used to be in their lives, period, full stop, SashaC. Argue otherwise and you will only further prove that the words that I have said are indeed the indisputable, undeniable, and axiomatic truth in their existence, period, full stop.

          • SashaC

            Join us in the modern age. Conversion therapy has repeatedly been proven not to work. Homosexuality has not been considered a mental disorder by the APA since 1973. Your statements are the opinions of someone who has a mental disorder themselves, not truth.

          • Pax Humana

            I will say right back at you with the join us in the modern age and whole mental disorder bit, SashaC(ommunist). Furthermore, it is funny how numerous criminal activities suddenly gives people that honestly have no business being in power the alleged legitimacy that they do not deserve in their lives, am I right?

          • Pax Humana

            Why not take your OWN advice about joining people in the modern age instead of ripping off other people from the past that thought as you did and that also got their little pyramid schemes broken, miss?

          • http://EdenPoliticalCartoons.com/ David John Eden

            The standard self-righteous gayBS talking point: “Why would anyone choose to be gay in the face of such horrid persecution?!” Come on! Anyone & everyone would choose to have pleasure with the same sex– if they were seduced into it, or if they began experimenting with it, & it felt good to them, if it satisfied an emotional or sexual need, or if they developed an addiction to the experience. —- no matter how much social grief it cost! You’re right, you enjoy the emotional comforts, but you stay for the sexual high. Get real. It’s not in your genes but in your jeans.

          • jmichael39

            Don’t bother, guys Sasha has exposed herself. She is here arguing that people of ‘protected classes’ deserve special rights the rest of us don’t deserve. She’s not asking for EQUAL rights…she’s asking for SPECIAL rights.

          • Pax Humana

            Did not Hitler and other like-minded people ALSO ask for “special rights” all throughout history?

          • jmichael39

            Hitler didn’t really “ask”…he just treated certain classes as better than others…even to the point of literally declaring some groups of people not even human…sorta like liberals treat pre-born babies as not human.

          • Pax Humana

            He did those things AFTER he did as I said that he did and libtards and other evil people of history have proven this to be true time and again in their lives.

          • Ryan Smith

            BS. This was a targeted attack on a Christian store just to get publicity. Once we stop identifying g ourselves by our sexual attractions this world will be a better place. The GLSO in this case are the ones that pass me off for just seeking out trouble to find positive press. I hope this christian store continues to stick with their convictions and refuse to print messages that go against their beliefs. It is their business and they have that right!

          • SashaC

            I hope they do too! Let them keep getting in trouble with the law! One less discriminatory Christian business. I’d even love to see them get arrested, if they continue to refuse to serve gays. A few less votes for the dying Republican Party, which you all are running into the ground with your intolerance.

            Also no, they don’t have that right. If you owned a business you would know that. And if you didn’t know it, you would deserve to lose your business for breaking the law.

          • Pax Humana

            …which is why LGBT people need to lose THEIR businesses for breaking the law, SashaC(ommunist).

      • http://NOYB.com Kess

        Sorry but they cannot violate peoples constitutional rights, the first amendment gives you the right to not be forced into accepting things you find immoral and are against your beliefs.

        Fire up the lawsuits against the commission.

        • Bolvon72

          The commission was following the law, they would have to take it up against the state. I think they will find that operating a business with public access does not give the the right not to provide the same services to everyone. It’s the way the wind is blowing… I think that’s a good thing.

          • KenS

            again this is not the same service, the same service would be another christian message just like the ones they have been giving to other customers.

          • Bolvon72

            They made a shirt for a brewery that said “Size matters” with a shirtless fat guy covering his nipples with his fingers… What’s the christian message there?

          • Pax Humana

            Bolvon72, the law itself is against the Constitution of the United States as well as OTHER laws, most notably, against the laws that bar “separate but equal” behavior, which the LGBT movement is NOTORIOUS for doing with people that disagree with their message, and ditto for Muslims, the Roman Catholic “church,” and many other groups of people that are in this country and world-wide, period, full stop.

      • GinnyLee

        The ‘law’ needs to be changed. It will take a while to ‘undo’ what the ‘politically correct’ nonsensical makers of rules and regulations have put in place.

        • Bolvon72

          It sure does, look how long it took to put these laws on the books to protect people from discrimination. The whole country would have to go bass ackwards again.

          • GinnyLee

            To confuse being “black” with being “gay” is a serious mistake. The original ‘discrimination’ laws were a matter of life or death for the blacks. Now, it has become a tool for every fool who thinks “he” has an honest complaint. Bah!

          • Bolvon72

            Who confused that? I was distinctly talking about the adding of LGBT persons to the groups protected under anti-discrimination laws.

    • DuneDude

      While you may deny service for illegal activities such as rioting, causing a public nuisance, legal orders, you cannot deny service without a valid and meaningful reason. Printing a pro-homosexual tee shirt is not a reason to deny service. In fact, most of those signs are illegal and cannot be enforced in any state. The person denied service has the right to call in law enforcement and make a formal complaint which can be taken into court when appropriate.

    • Gregory Peterson

      Ask the (white) Citizens’ Councils about that. They made the so called “right to refuse service” into a weapon which actually produced economic refugees who had to move to more tolerant areas in order to work, buy food, gas, do ordinary business transactions.

      There is a reason for the Civil Rights Act fifty years ago. The concept of “protected classes” is long settled law…except for conservatives who approve of capricious discrimination and creating dangerous minority stress.

      • John Buchanan

        So Greg, let me see if I understand the same Bible which declares in Romans 1 that homosexuality is sin against God, unnatural, separating one from the ice if God and not without penalty, is the same Bible which courts require one to place their hands on to swear under oath to tell the truth because it is regarded as truth , you seem to skirt around to manipulate courts ? I’d suggest you take it up with the Creator of the universe. His opinion is the one that matters

      • Denise Miller Rorabaugh

        The business isn’t refusing service if gays or atheists. They are refusing to provide a product they find offensive regardless of who asks for it. That is NOT that save as Jim Crow laws which prevented blacks from being served because of their race. Two totally different things and quite offensive to black history.

    • SashaC

      Hey! Fancy seeing you here! I’m on this sight regularly. 🙂

      I actually own a small business, so maybe I can shed a little light. The right to refuse service for any reason is a myth. You can refuse service for legitimate reasons, but you can never break the law in order to do so. You can also refuse without a reason at all, as long as no one can prove it’s for an illegal reason. This is the way to “get away” with discriminating, but these people always end up running their mouths and making it obvious they are discrimating because these people are gay, which is why they end up in trouble. Sexual orientation is a federally protected class, just like race or gender. So when you admit you are refusing to serve a member of the public (who you have the privilege of having access to by running a public business) for such reasons, you are breaking the law. You are welcome to your personal beliefs, but your business as an entity is generally not.

      • Evolution is a fact

        Hey SashaC! Thanks for clearing that up. Admittedly I am fuzzy on the legality of this sort of thing, but I’m generally in favor of not letting businesses discriminate based on race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. But, could the government force a kosher or halal butcher shop to butcher a pig? As silly as find the belief in “unclean” animals, I would be hard pressed to endorse the government forcing them to do it. Thoughts?

        • SashaC

          What class would not butchering a pig discriminate against, though? Plus, that’s a matter of not offering a product at all. If you go to a restaurant and what you like is not on the menu, you cannot demand it. For instance, I can’t go to a vegetarian restaurant and cry discrimination because they don’t offer a burger. But if they refuse to serve me a salad because I’m gay (or black, or a woman, or disabled) I have a case. This shop sells and prints shirts. There is no reason they cannot accommodate the customers in this case, except for discriminatory illegal reasons. If the gay customers came in asking for something they do not sell TO ANYONE, the screen printing company could decline with no issue.

          I’m rushed a bit due to work, so I hope this makes sense. It’s probably not very eloquent and longer winded then necessary. Sorry! 🙂

          • Evolution is a fact

            No worries. I understand your point. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

          • SashaC

            No, I’m not looking to destroy your argument at all! I enjoy being able to speak rationally with someone who actually cares to listen. You and I don’t get a lot of that, lol!

            The actual customer does not have to be gay. They are still discriminating against gays. If I as a straight person went in to have shirts printed for a gay event I supported and they refused, they are still discriminating against me based on their assumption that I am part of a class that is protected. Discrimination is discrimation, whether they assume accurately or not. The issue is their reasoning and intent.

          • Evolution is a fact

            I enjoy it too, SashaC. Rational discourse is tough to find these days.
            Ok, last time I’ll bug you about this.

            Scenario 1: I walk into a Kosher restaurant and order pork chops. I’m told, “sorry, we don’t serve pork due to our religious beliefs”. Discrimination?

            Scenario 2: I walk into a Christian t-shirt shop and ask for a shirt to be printed that says “support gay marriage” and I’m told, “sorry, we can’t do that due to our religious beliefs”. Discrimination?

          • SashaC

            Scenario 1: Not discrimination. They do not offer pork to anyone. They are in essence discriminating against pork, which is permissible by law for any reason they wish, lol. However, they are not discriminating against you. If they served pork, but refused to serve it to you because you’re a woman, or black or gay, that is illegal.

            Scenario 2: Discrimination. They sell shirts to the public. You are requesting a shirt that is not offensive (which they may have policies against). There is no legitimate reason to deny your request other that that they are discriminating against you, based on their religious beliefs. They are welcome to their personal beliefs, but their business as an entity is not allowed to discriminate. You may ask, couldn’t they just create a policy that they don’t print shirts with gay subjects? No. That violates discrimination laws, which trump any individual policies.

          • Evolution is a fact

            Ah, I think I get it now. In both cases, they are discriminating, but discriminating against pork is legal, discriminating against gays isn’t. Makes sense to me.

          • Gary

            Your sexual preferences do not override their religious beliefs.

          • SashaC

            Really? Because I’m pretty sure this whole article is about how it did…

          • Gary

            That will change.

          • SashaC

            I’ll be waiting with bated breath…

          • SashaC

            Oh and btw, you’re not bugging me at all! 🙂

          • KenS

            This is exactly what Im saying, this product is not on their inventory/menu either.

          • SashaC

            I have already answered you in your other two posts, but perhaps third time is a charm. Offering goods and offering services are two different things. If the print shop wants to stop offering custom orders of the clients choice or design, they would have no problem and your argument would stand. But if they offer the service, they must offer it equally, in accordance with the law.

          • KenS

            My posts were all done before I saw any of your replies, but I still am not in agreement with your interpretation, just because it offers customization of christian messages, does not mean you can ask for non-christian messages, that would be no different than asking for a vegetarian menu item to add slips of meat into one of its dishes, do you see my point now???

          • SashaC

            No, because you continue to fail to understand how things work, when it comes to business and the law. Continue on, but I give up trying to explain it to you. Tell the courts, since they obviously disagree.

          • KenS

            What i am saying is by your logic, a vegetarian restaurant would also be discriminating by not letting the customer request that they add meat to one of their menu items. There is no difference to that request than there is to this request by these people.

          • SashaC

            Okay Ken, I will give this one more go, since you are being civil this time.

            A vegetarian restaurant does not have the MEANS to put meat in your food. They do not carry meat. Let’s take it a step further and say you brought a steak and asked them to cook it for you. They could decline, citing that your meat would contaminate the kitchen, endangering the health and well being of their vegetarian customers.

            The print shop has the MEANS to print the shirts. They have shirts. They have ink. They have the screen printing equipment. Most importantly, they OFFER the SERVICE of screen printing. Printing the shirts does not endanger their or their customer’s health or well being. The only reason to decline to print shirts for the gay rally are for reasons of discrimination. You, personally, have that luxury in many arenas, but your business does not. By accepting a business license, you are agreeing to follow those laws governing it.

            Now, if they stop offering custom services and only sell pre printed Christian shirts, no one has a right to request anything else, because they don’t make special shirts FOR ANYONE.

          • Guest

            So then the t-shirt shop’s argument should be simple. They refuse to print ANY products with ANY message which they disapprove.

          • SashaC

            Either you have not been paying attention, or your reading comprehension is poor.

      • John Buchanan

        Genesis 1 makes it clear that orientation is a lie. Homosexuality and lesbianism is a choice. God wouldn’t call it sin otherwise. The crux of the issue is the person’s Christian business owners beliefs. God’s opinion is far more important.

        • SashaC

          Too bad for you the government doesn’t agree with you. As long as you are alive and live here in the US, the law matters.

          • Gary

            We are not going to accept or obey immoral laws.

          • SashaC

            I love that idea! Break the law. In fact, you should stand up for your beliefs, even if it means prison time! Then there would be fewer of you in society, which leads to fewer Republican votes and a lot less hate and hypocrisy. Hell, you may even get to experience gay sex firsthand, so you’ll be on our side by the time you get out! Win win!

          • Gary

            God hates homosexuals, and so do I. But we are not hypocrites about it.

          • SashaC

            You speak directly to god? They can put you on medication for that, you know.

          • Pax Humana

            Yes, it is too bad that the government is violating numerous laws that CAN still be enforced in enforcing another law, SashaC(ommunist)!

          • SashaC

            Lol! Is the communist comment supposed to hurt my feelings? What are you, 14?

          • Pax Humana

            I am far older than 14, but even when I WAS 14, I was even smarter in one little pinky tip than you will EVER be in your whole body, so you can imagine how much more intelligent that I am since then, miss. Even your little leaders refer to you as a “useful (useless) idiot,” which goes to show you just how much that Lucifer truly loves and cares about you, miss.

        • G Backsheer

          Luckily, God’s laws aren’t on the books in the good ol U-S-A.

          I’ve heard Iran is a great place to go for the anti-gay discrimination. They allow beheadings, stoning, and hanging for getting caught in some old fashioned man-man love.

          • Gary

            Since you want an immoral country, you should be happy with the way things are going.

          • G Backsheer

            I want a country where individual rights and freedoms are protected, along with the recognition that society sometimes uses the mechanism of the state to subjugate certain groups. Intelligently balancing the two is one part of good governance, which I’m happy won out against the antiquated arguments of the majority’s “morality”

          • Gary

            In other words, you want the government to back whatever you want, even if it means the rights of others are infringed.

          • G Backsheer

            Haha .. that’s not what I said if you would use some reading comprehension. There is a long history of the majority in this country imposing their morals and values to subjugate other groups. Blacks, homosexuals, immigrants, etc.

            I want a country where we recognize that individual rights are important, but not the ultimate, no-questions-asked concept to structure a civil society around. Jim Crow was also seen as an expression of people’s “beliefs” that America shouldn’t mix the races. The government stepped in when that was obviously seen as a violation of American principles like self-determination and freedom because it oppressed a specific group of Americans.

          • Gary

            We are not going to treat homosexuals as equals. You can if you want to, but millions of us won’t. Even if the government says we must.

          • G Backsheer

            At least you’re up front about being a homophobic f**k.

          • Pax Humana

            G Backsheer, without the Holy Scriptures of Christianity and Judaism, you would NOT have the Constitution of the United States, nor would you have any of the state Constitutions or any local laws on the books, period, full stop.

          • G Backsheer

            You’re wrong. The Constitution is a secular document and specifically tries to distance the state from religion. The Founding Father being religious is a myth, most of them participated in it only because of societal expectation.

          • Pax Humana

            BULLSHIT!

          • G Backsheer

            A compelling argument in response, no doubt.

        • Michael Gibney

          To act, carry out / have sex is most certainly a choice – I agree. But as for finding one person attractive and another person repulsive … well, THAT simply is NOT a choice. Did you choose to be attracted to the one you’re attracted to or did it feel effortless and natural for you to be attracted to your wife/girlfriend? I am not attracted to western women. I only find asian women (Chinese, Japanese, Korean etc) attractive. It’s just how my brain works. It’s not a choice, I don’t say that to disagree with you or debate with you, I say it because it is the simple truth. And if you’re for the TRUTH you would agree. You didn’t choose to be straight and if you have never had any same sex attraction then you have no experience and no understanding on the subject to tell others it’s their ‘choice’. My point is not wether being gay is right or wrong, I’m not wanting to go into that. Aside from either belief, I am simply saying it is NOT a choice, wether it is wrong or not. Even if it is wrong, it is still out of people’s control of how their brains and hormones and development happened. As for orgies, having sex outside of marriage, one night stands i.e. the physical acts etc. … that IS a choice but NOT the attraction. People cannot choose to suddenly find women or men attractive by thought or choosing to. If you still disagree and believe it is a choice, then you are saying that John Buchanan could ‘choose’ to find a man attractive by thought alone if he so wished. Sounds ridiculous, right? So what can we conclude from all this? Simple – It’s not in the mind because that’s not how biology works. God made us much more complex than that. Bless you.

          • John Buchanan

            Michael, I appreciate your perspective and obviously we differ . My first concern is God’s perspective as He is my first love. I hold a Biblical worldview but I can assure that has not always been the case. I’ve done my share of sin, sexual and otherwise . Your sins are no greater than mine. I discovered a loving God who was ready to forgive and I choose to live for Him. My love for God takes precedence over whatever my desires are. If God’s word says it’s sin , which it does , then I’m opposed . I’m not judging and I’m not hating, I’m just saying.

          • Michael Gibney

            I totally 100% respect that John. That’s great; to love God’s Word. I’ve no problem with that. I in no way was implying you hate anyone. I’m sorry if you got that from my post. It’s totally fine if you want to hold a Biblical worldview. I wasn’t saying wether gay is right or wrong. I wasn’t on that topic. My whole point is that it’s not a choice – it’s really out of people’s hands what sexuality they turn out to be. Does the Bible say it is a choice? I’m only asking because I have never read anywhere that the Word says it’s a choice. Jesus said nothing on the subject so it’s always been a grey area to me, one which I’m not willing to swing either way on. I let God be the judge of that. I don’t believe it is a choice, unless the Word of God proves otherwise. Jesus Himself left it blank so I go by Jesus and in this case, He gave me nothing to go on. If I’m wrong, please enlighten me. Bless you.

          • John Buchanan

            Michael, you seem a rational man who, like all of us are on a journey . I am certain that as you seek truth, you will find it. I believe that God reveals Himself to all that desire relationship .
            Jesus mostly certain addressed the issue in Matthew 19:4-6
            Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning created them male and female and for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined let no man separate.
            This reinforces the Genesis account of creation and expresses God’s heart and intent. The Apostle Paul , who wrote about two thirds of the New Testament , made God’s position on homosexuality/ lesbianism , very clear. It’s sin. There are many sins, no felonies or misdemeanors in the courts of heaven, all of them require forgiveness. I know I have a choice to sleep with my neighbors wife . I choose not to. I have a choice to lie. I choose not to. I have a choice worship idols, which could be money, power , etc…and put those things before God, I choose not to. Scripture tells me all these things are sin, so regardless of how good they might feel to me, because Jesus is my first love, I choose a life of pursuing Him, honoring His desires, and being in relationship with Him. I found for myself no real , lasting satisfaction in those things compared to the love of Jesus and the peace I’ve found in Him. He changed my life. I hope you and everyone comes to know my friend in a real way.

          • Michael Gibney

            Thank you bro. I have read that. I’m interested in where Christ talked about Homosexuality. Here, Jesus is clearly talking about Heterosexuality. But where does Jesus condemn Homosexuality? That’s what I want to read. Not Paul or anyone else or the old testament account of old Jewish traditions and societal view points. Whatever Jesus said about it in the Bible, then I’ll agree, because I believe He is the real deal and the truth. Right now, I neither agree or disagree about homosexuality because I’m not to judge.

            With the upmost respect, and I sincerely mean that, I think it’s a little short sighted and presumptuous of you to assume I do not know Jesus or haven’t been baptised and have had a relationship with him for over six years now since being Born Again. I understand you don’t know me, but that’s precisely why we shouldn’t be quick to assume someone isn’t saved. Just a suggestion. I know you wrote it with a right heart, so it’s all good. It’s just always best to ask someone wether they are a believer or not, I feel. This is a bit of a common flaw I’ve experienced in the Body and within the Church. Christians tend to see anyone they don’t know as non-believers / lost. Not always the case. God Bless you brother.

          • John Buchanan

            Good morning Michael, a common response in the gay community is -show me where Jesus addressed homosexuality , oh He didn’t therefore it must be okay. Jesus also didn’t speak out about ecstasy, heroin, crystal meth, strip clubs, internet porn. I can think of many things He didn’t address , but doesn’t make them acceptable. Granted 2,000 years ago these things were non issues. Men were stoned to death if caught in the act of sodomy , so it certainly wasn’t promoted , as it is today by Hollywood. I don’t have to convince you what is sin against God , as scripture and the Holy Spirit show us things that displease God. To believe in Jesus means you are a New Testament believer , which is all about grace and the fact that Jesus paid for your sins and mine at the cross. If you believe that , you must accept the man that God used to write over two thirds of the New Testament – the Apostle Paul. Paul is the epitome of a changed life, knocked off your horse, blinded
            and radically humbled and transformed from a Christian killer to a sold out , completely devoted follower of Christ. You can’t minimize his words in Romans 1 or skirt around them . I wasn’t being presumptive about where you are on your pilgrimage. I would call into question anyone who tells me they are a Christian. The first question I would ask somebody is to share their testimony. If somebody has truly met Jesus they are never the same. I need to see evidence of a changed life. Paul said “If any man be in Christ, behold he is a new creation, old things have passed away and all things are made new. 2 Cor.5;17 Anybody can say they believe in Jesus, but even the Devil believes in Jesus and trembles at His name. Jesus paid too high a price for changed lives . He died a tortuous, bloody death for the sins of humanity. The Cross demands change. Everyone is welcome at the cross , but nobody can leave the same way they came. When somebody tells me they used to be a crackhead or a heroin addict, an alcoholic, a lying, cheating sex addict who went from bed to bed, gambling, carousing, self absorbed scoundrel , who cared nothing for his fellow man and now lives for Jesus Christ, is a devoted follower or disciple who longs to worship, pray, study and bears evidence of life change by helping others, shows kindness and love towards his fellow man. Those are the hallmarks I look for. So yes, I don’t believe homosexuality and Christianity are compatible. I do believe it’s sexual sin, scripture supports that. Paul said that all sexual sin is like sinning against are own bodies. Any sexual sin separates us from the life of God . When I consider the woman caught in the temple in the very act of adultery , I consider her sin , just as mine before Christ , as deserving death but forgiven because of Jesus. Her life was forever changed that day after meeting the real Jesus, a loving , merciful , compassionate King. He looked at her with eyes of love and understanding and said go and sin no more. That’s my Jesus .

        • Michael Gibney

          Although, apart from the ‘choice’ topic, I think that it’s disgusting how a Christian company is being forced and bullied into doing something that’s against their beliefs. That’s despicable. I’d like to see them try that to Hindu ran businesses or Muslim businesses. They wouldn’t because they feel Christians are a walk over. You’re not living in a democracy if this is allowed. You’re living in dictatorship. “Do as we command or else.” Discrimination to the max.

      • Rose

        I still don’t understand why Atheists are getting on a Christian site? Do you just get on here to bully Christians? Are you trying to debate? I mean, there are Atheist sites everywhere, and you could make fun of Christians there all you want. But instead you chose to get on here, and ‘slight regularly’ by your words. Why is that?

        • SashaC

          I suppose for the same reason Christians come to our sights.

          • Rose

            And why do you believe the reason Christians come on your sites?

          • rebekah26

            AHHHH, it’s, sites, not sights.

          • SashaC

            Wow, lol! Calm down, it’s just autocorrect.

        • http://www.youtube.com/user/EyrtheFyre Regina Forbes

          Look at it this way Rose, we can use this as an opportunity to share the Gospel. But I get where you’re coming from. We should be able to feel comfortable to speak freely on our own “home turf” without being sniped at BUT as you know, Our Lord hit the nail on the head when He told us the world is gonna hate us for loving Him. But hey, we can always look on the bright side…they don’t throw us to the lions anymore…they just really REALLY annoy the heck out of us all! LOL

          • Rose

            Lol, thank you for giving me a new perspective. I really appreciate it. 😀

      • Jeff Levy

        “Sexual orientation is a federally protected class”

        Um that is only for Federal employee’s and Business’s that have Government Contracts…

        ENDA as John Boehner claims he has never seen LGBT Discrimination ever and will not let ENDA be voted on…

        I can be legally Discriminated in my home State of Missouri and the State where I live Kansas there is NO LGBT discrimination laws
        I can be legally Kick out of a Business, refused service, refused housing, refused employment, Fired from a Job, all because I am Gay…

        Some States have Laws against Discriminating against LGB’s and very few States have it for T’s…

        And I have been kicked out of Hobby Lobby for being Gay… I was wearing an Equality Marriage button (the blue with the yellow Equal sign) and a Smiley face Rainbow Button… in Kansas

        and was fired at which I can’t prove from my last Job in Missouri for being Gay…

        NO laws in either one of these two States that says they can’t discriminate against LGBT’s…
        Yet (I wasn’t “FIRED” they claimed they was doing away with that position so they let the guy who was never late or missed any days of work and did his job and Helped others out when Not having anything to do) and kept the guy who was lazy didn’t do his job right didn’t help anyone else out and was late 2 to 3 times a week every week… then a week later what did I see in the news paper they was hiring for the position they said they eliminated… and yet this company even says they do not discriminate against LBGT’s… granted the company as a whole does but the supervisor I had does…

        • SashaC

          I’m sorry you’ve been through all of that. It’s disgusting. We’ll see an end to that sooner rather than later though. In the past 20 years we’ve gotten much further than I thought we would, concerning gay rights. 20 years from now, people will look back on the backwards views expressed here the way we look back on the views of those who did not support racial equality. Younger generations do not agree at all with these people. Their time is up and their grip on this country (and the world) is weakening. They are the last of their kind and they know it-you can tell by the way they act.

          • Jeff Levy

            Thanks SashaC

          • SashaC

            You’re quite welcome. 🙂

    • Bruce Morrow

      Its GONE in this country! Some people’s “rights” trump others!

      • James Grimes

        Bruce, that’s part of the Liberal agenda in which they want to transform this country into a nanny state and worse.

    • The Last Trump

      Have to commend you on your response. Nice to see such honesty regardless of your opinion on Christianity. Wrong is wrong, so absolutely call a spade a spade. Can you imagine the uproar if the courts dared to insist that the LGBT community SUPPORT or PROMOTE traditional marriage and the family! NEVER HAPPEN. Guess it’s ok to trample on the very normal, and natural beliefs of most in favour of others. Wait, didn’t we used to call THAT discrimination?…maybe, prejudiced?….go figure.

    • Deborah Lundy

      That right only applies to the fringe groups. A white, Christian owned business has no rights. If we do not bow before the very small percentage of the population then we must be taken down and made an example of.

  • Randi Meehan

    If they made Christian apparel, why did the gay group think that they would make t-shirts for their gay pride festival? How did they justify that as being “Christian Apparel?” It sounds like HRC examiner Greg Munson discriminated against the t-shirt company.

    • Bolvon72

      Maybe they are the cheapest printer in town? Maybe it’s just a statement. I feel that these situations should be avoided, not out of sensitivity towards a discriminatory business, but because their business always skyrockets because of the press.

      • SashaC

        Sometimes, but not always. The baker that discriminated against gays, Sweet Cakes by Melissa, closed their storefront and moved into their home. They are appealing a $150,000 fine as well. Another baker was just fined and ordered to start making gay wedding cakes as well.

    • C.P. Steinmetz

      So, if they are homosexual, are you saying that ipso facto, they cannot be Christian?

      • jmichael39

        Any person living in ANY unrepentant sin can ‘call’ themselves a Christian. But an unrepentant will not be entering the kingdom of heaven. The Scriptures are clear on this. So, if you want to call them “Christians” feel free. Its purely semantics.

        • jmichael39

          And besides, the plaintiff in this case was quite clear that it was not the people they were rejecting, but the message they were wanting them to print on the t-shirts. Surely, even IF the homosexuals, in this case, were Christians (by whatever stretch of the Scriptures you want to employ), surely you would not be against the company standing against the message of sin they wanted this company to print onto the t-shirts. What if some porno company came to them and asked them print t-shirt showing a woman giving oral pleasure to a man on t-shirts? You think they should be required to print those?

        • rebekah26

          Your comment regarding unrepentance is in direct contradiction to grace.

          • jmichael39

            I would gladly respond to that comment, but rather than jumping to conclusions and perhaps responding inappropriately to your intentions, I would like to ask you a question of clarification.

            How is the doctrine of repentance in contradiction to the doctrine of grace?

            Romans 6

            6 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

            5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified withHim, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

            12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts.13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members asinstruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

        • James Grimes

          There are christians and there are Christians. Those in name – only have a secular worldview. Legitimate Christians hold to a biblical worldview. Secular christianity is totally acceptable because it poses no threat to the enemies of God, but, as we see on this site and elsewhere, biblical Christianity is attacked with much hatred.

        • KenS

          Im sorry to inform you, but that is wrong doctrine. Any non-christian person living in any unrepentant sin will not enter the kingdom of heaven, but if they are a christian living in unrepentant sin, they will still go to heaven, but will lose rewards/crowns etc because of the unrepentant of sin. It is dangerous doctrine to say that a christian can lose their salvation because of 1 sin. The bible is full of references to the eternal security of the believer. God will chastise and possibly even call a believer home to heaven early because of his unrepentant sin so as to save HIS witness, but he will not send a truly born-again believer to hell for sins he has already paid for on the cross. Once a sinner has repented and believed on Christ, all sins, past, present and future have been paid for by Jesus’s Blood. This means if the christian should slip, which we all do, just read I John 1;8-10, he will not be sent to hell because of it, he will still go to heaven, but will receive chastisement from God until he repents/asks forgiveness for it.

          • jmichael39

            “Im sorry to inform you, but that is wrong doctrine. Any non-christian person living in any unrepentant sin will not enter the kingdom of heaven, but if they are a christian living in unrepentant sin, they will still go to heaven, but will lose rewards/crowns etc because of the unrepentant of sin.” – great, then I think will go have an affair…lie whenever I want…watch porn all night long and become involved in some bisexual orgies…and whatever other sins I can think of doing while I still can here on earth. If all I’m gonna lose out on a few eternal rewards, but I still get to be in heaven…why not?

            Luke 17:3 – “Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you,[a] rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him.” – IF he repents, forgive him.

            I understand your point of view. But I have to agree with the theme of James’ post. We are known by our fruit. A person saved and filled with the Holy Spirit will NOT continue to live in unrepentant sin. Does that mean that these Christians don’t struggle with some very controlling sins? No. But not a single one of them denies the sinfulness of the sin or the need to be freed of it. Repentance begins in the mind and in the heart. It may take a very long time…perhaps a lifetime…to break free of that sin. But the fruit of a Christian is a desire…a yearning…an unquenchable desire to be free of those sins. THAT is repentance…or at least the beginning of it.

          • KenS

            im not denying any of that, a true christian will not want to go and sin willingly out of love for God for what he has done for us. He may as you suggest here have a long fight to break free of that sin, but the point that i was making is that a christian will still go to heaven if he is still has not won that lifetime battle with sin and commits that sin one last time and perchance death comes so quickly that he has not had a chance to repent of it. That is all Im trying to say here. Remember there is also the sin unto death, where if your willful sinning is hurting your testimony, God will call you home to heaven in order to save HIS testimony. In this case the sin has still not been repented of, but the christian has gone to heaven.

          • jmichael39

            And nothing, KenS, that I said contradicts what you just said. So great, we’re on the same page. Be well.

    • Chandra

      The organizer went to that printer with the purpose of causing problems:

      “During a hearing regarding the matter this past June, GSLO representative Aaron Baker admitted to the commission that his desire to force Christians to print pro-homosexual messages works both ways, and that the homosexual companies could be forced to print messages for the Westboro Baptist “Church.”

    • James Grimes

      Was the t – shirt company set up by militant Gays so there would be an issue that required state intervention? Would anyone be surprised if that was the case?

  • Gregory Peterson

    If sexual orientation is a protected class in LEXINGTON, Ky., and the business is licensed to serve the public, they must… serve the public without discriminating against protected classes.

    It’s not like the concept of a “protected class” is something untried and novel. It’s been 50 years since the Civil Rights Act was passed, and even longer in my city and state, which passed anti-discrimination statutes in the middle 1950s….back when the Bible Belt was hunkering down to keep segregation legal by most any means short of civil war…which included a high level of terrorism to support discrimination.

    Not to mention that the T-shirt design was hardly an objectionable, obscene design. It could have worked for other organizations celebrating an important to them anniversary.

    “We’ll work with anybody. But if there’s a specific message that conflicts with my convictions, then I can’t promote that.”

    Obviously, you didn’t work with GLSO. 1 Timothy 5:22, Ephesians 5:7 aren’t applicable to the situation, unless maybe you’re a self-righteous sort who scavenges the Bible for verses that you think privilege yourself at the expense of others.

    • bowie1

      So you wouldn’t have a problem with printing “God hates Fags” t-shirt if you were in that business?

      • Rose

        Any Christian would have an issue with that because God loves everybody. You can love somebody but disprove their sin, and while God doesn’t approve of Gay marriage, he loves the person very much still.

      • SashaC

        The gay customer didn’t ask for a “Christians are a$$holes” shirt. See the difference?

        • jmichael39

          Frankly, THAT doesn’t violate their religious beliefs. If someone wants to speak ill of me, as a Christian, I’m not even remotely concerned about that. But when you ask me to ‘endorse’ through my actions something that does violate my religious beliefs (i.e – supporting homosexuality, supporting porn, supporting anything that violates the beliefs of my faith), then I DO have a problem with that. Do YOU see the difference? No? I didn’t think so. Oh well…off you go.

    • Bruce Morrow

      Sounds like what you want is a FAVOURED class of citizens. Tell me Mr.Peterson, would you in all HONESTY print T-shirts stating “Homosexuality is SIN” if YOU happened to own a company that printed T-shirts? Be honest now….

  • jmichael39

    the ramifications of this are enormous. The HRC Commissioner is correct in comparing this to the idea that a gay t-shirt company would have to do business with an organization like Westboro Baptist Church. His problem is in his ruling. NEITHER should be required. What’s next? Does ABC have to accept advertising from every company that is willing to pay the advertising fee? Even if the message of that company violates the intended standings of the ABC? A company has a right to determine whether the message being conveyed by them doing business with a particular company violates the standards upon which they wish to do business and/or could do irreparable harm to their business in other ways.

  • Chandra

    So they have to go against their beliefs to print things they don’t believe in….doesn’t say when the order has to be done. 😉 They could get suddenly really busy and backed up with orders. Waiting period could be 1 year.

    • SashaC

      You can’t seriously believe it works that way. So then they would skip over the gay client’s order and fill the orders that came in after them? How obvious would that be? I’d love to see how that would that hold up in court!

      • Chandra

        You can’t be naive enough to think it doesn’t happen. I have worked in t-shirt shops before. It happens. How are you going to prove otherwise? You were warned the business was running behind and there was a possible wait.

        • SashaC

          Lol! Congrats at working at a tshirt shop, but have you actually ever owned or run a business? If I was told a shop was too far backed up to serve me and I felt I was being discriminated against, I’d simply call and pose as a different customer, or send in a friend, to see what you tell them. Then when I sue, the court would simply subpoena business records and see that the shop has continued to do business with others, though they were supposedly backed up too far to accommodate me. It’s not difficult to look at someone’s books and immediately see the truth.

          Btw, I actually did this once. Years ago I was discriminated against at an apartment complex. They told me they had no apartments to lease, but I had a hunch something was up. I called after I left, inquiring about their vacancies. They told me they had plenty available and to come by anytime. I ended up getting the employees involved fired. I should have sued, but I was young and didn’t pursue it further. Not everyone is stupid.

          There are ways to use the law to successfully discriminate. But your idea is extremely sloppy and unrealistic.

        • The Last Trump

          They took the high road and were absolutely honest. No one would have ever guessed the government would actually attempt to legislate people into acting against their very beliefs and morals. Never would have held up in court before. Until now. Welcome to the new America where difference in opinion and beliefs is called discrimination!? But only concerning one party.

          • BarkingDawg

            The law existed before the order was refused.

  • Susan Moore

    It seems to me that Homosexual people are going out of there way to have things made from Christian businesses to start a problem on purpose. You know how Christians feel, you can go somewhere else and have T-Shirts, cakes, etc…. made.

  • Steven James

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
    prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
    speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
    assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

    1st Amendment to the US Constitution signifying it’s importance to the framers. Note the religious clauses are the first noted and there are two, again signifying it’s importance to the framers.

    Government can make no law which establishes a state religion. Nor can government prohibit the free exercise of a person’s religion.

    This is a clear instance of government regulating an individuals religion and is a CLEAR violation of the 1st Amendment rights of these individuals.

    No lesser law trumps a Constitutional right.

    • BarkingDawg

      Selling t-shirts is not a religious activity.

      • Steven James

        Really?

        The owners of the shop stated that they will not print T-shirts that
        promote an activity which they believe runs counter to their religion.
        That makes it a religious event for them which is enough to protect them
        under the First Amendment.

        You do not leave your religion at the door when you walk outside of your house. It follows you EVERYWHERE and is part of EVERYTHING you do. WHEN you are religious. If you are not, you have no comprehension of what religion means for many people. But that’s OK, that’s why we have the Constitution of the United States which is the LAW of the land. It protects certain rights and religion just happens to be the very first it protects.

        Now lets be clear here. The Constitution was never designed to protect an individual from another individual. There is no “right” for one individual to force someone else to do something they don’t want to do. The Constitution is a protection from the GOVERNMENT. It protects the individual from the government forcing them to do something they do not want to do.

        • BarkingDawg

          Their buisness license requires them to obey the laws.

          The law says: don’t discriminate.

          Discrimination is not, nor has it ever been a legitimate religeous practice.

          It is evil.

          Discrimination is the devil working his evil through you.

          • Steven James

            Since you missed it the first time, THIS is the LAW:

            “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

            Discrimination can indeed be evil, but not always, and it can be the devil working through you, but not always.

            There is clear discrimination in this case and I do believe it is the devil working his way through the hearts of those involved. The discrimination is being practiced by the Kentucky Commission who is violating the 1st Amendment rights of these business owners.

            Forcing anyone to violate their religious principles is evil and most likely under the devils influence.

          • BarkingDawg

            Discriminating against someone has NEVER been part of the excercise of any recognized religion.

          • Steven James

            Really? I’m gathering you aren’t religious because it’s becoming clear you don’t understand the concept well.

            Most religions are very discriminatory. Some to the point where they will kill you if you don’t accept their particular viewpoint.

            Christianity happens to be one of the more accepting but even there is a limit. The general saying is “love the sinner but hate the sin”. This means you accept the individual for who they are, a child of God. It does not mean you accept their sin. Nor does it mean you must endorse their sin.

            These business owners have no problem dealing with this lesbian couple. They will print their t-shirts if their design does not violate their own particular religious belief. The t-shirts they were asked to print did violate their religious beliefs. This is not discrimination against the individuals.

            I frankly don’t understand why they feel they have the right to insist to do business with a company that does not share their beliefs. I don’t do business with companies that violate my own ethics. I go somewhere else. I speak with my money. That’s how business works.

          • jmichael39

            You’re assuming again that the owners refused to do business with these customers because they were gay and not because what they were asking them to produce was in violation of the owner’s religious beliefs.

          • BarkingDawg

            You presume that there is a difference.

            Once again, there is no form of religious exercise that countenances discrimination.

            Refusal to provide public accommodation based on who the customer is is discrimination.

          • jmichael39

            Barky says, “Refusal to provide public accommodation based on who the customer is is discrimination.” – You’re still ASSuming that they refused service based upon WHO the customer was and not what the customer was asking them to produce. Unless you have some information that directly refutes the claims of the owner that their decision to reject the business was based upon the message of the shirt and not based upon who the customers were, you’re SOL, buddy.

          • BarkingDawg

            Too bad, so sad.

            It was discrimination based on sexual orientation.

            Too bad for you.

          • jmichael39

            Well, now, THERE’S logic for ya. Gees, Barky…take a class on logic sometime and get back to us. Until, go troll somewhere else.

          • jmichael39

            And exactly what is the basis of you concluding that they chose not to print that particular message on t-shirts based upon their discrimination of the customers?

          • jmichael39

            does that law delineated between discriminating against the person vs. the type of product that person requests from that company? In other words,
            1) would it be discriminatory, according to that law, for the business to reject those same t-shirts, if the persons placing the order were NOT homosexual themselves?

            2) would the owners still be considered discriminatory if those same homosexual customers ordered some other t-shirts that were not related to their homosexual lifestyle and the owners agreed to print those?

            3) would it be discriminatory for a similar business to owned by gays to reject an order made by two Christians who wanted t-shirts that said, “Homosexuality is a sin”?

            4) would it be discriminatory if a videographer refused to accept a job filming a heterosexual porn movie because it violates his religious beliefs? What if the offer was to film an homosexual porn movie?

            The bottom line is that it has to be proven that the intent of the owners was to discriminate against these customers because they were homosexuals and for no other reason.

    • James Grimes

      The Atheists will tell you otherwise.

  • dtrcbma

    I’m telling you people, they are coming after the churches next….No one or any organization is going to be safe from these people.

    • G Backsheer

      spooky.

    • BarkingDawg

      Convert the old fallout shelter in your basement into a modern priest hole.

      • jmichael39

        Can you BE any more of an ass?

        • BarkingDawg

          Can you BE any more of a bigot?

          • jmichael39

            Since I am NOT a bigot, yes, I could be more of one. Next imbecilic question, Barky.

          • BarkingDawg

            Oh, yes you are.
            You are a self righteous, hate filled bigot.

          • jmichael39

            Prove it. You wanna make accusations…you’d better be ready to prove ’em. Or did you miss that class on being a human being?

          • jmichael39

            Again, what is the basis for making that accusation?

          • BarkingDawg

            your posts.

          • jmichael39

            LMAO…that’s your ‘evidence’…make your case, or stop making false accusations.

        • James Grimes

          Oh yes, he can. Just wait for more idiotic comments.

        • Go Away

          Yes, he could be… He could be YOU!

          • jmichael39

            still waiting for your attempts at logic, GW…so far, the only connection any of your posts have to logic is that they have none.

          • Go Away

            I wouldn’t expect an xtian to understand anything about logic. Did the talking snake from your holy book teach that to you?

          • jmichael39

            spare me you’re vitriol. You’re an intellectual coward…enter into the debate or GO AWAY.

          • Go Away

            You object to my mentioning the talking snake? Would you like me to mention how your book calls a bat a bird? Or is that another part that you conveniently ignore? How about “the flood” myth? You claim to be an intellectual, but you believe a book that’s about as accurate as a Saturday morning cartoon. Grow up!

          • jmichael39

            You really like red herrings don’t you. One after another after another. You want someone to address every perceived ‘error’ in the Bible for you? I highly doubt it would make one bit of difference and literally has nothing to do with the topic of this discussion.

            But here…for you…what other rabbit trails would you like to take before you actually answer my questions?

            Let’s start with the simple answer. Obviously, Linnean classification was not available in the time of the writing of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and the scientific definition of what a “bird” was did not exist either. Classification of animals and things was made by different means: function or form. In this case, the word we render birds means simply “owner of a wing”, the word being ‘owph, which comes from a root word which means to cover or to fly.

            The category of ‘owph includes birds, bats, and certain insects. It would also have included pterosaurs, if they had been around. Even modern ecologists classify water-dwelling life in a very similar way according to their mode of living: plankton (floaters/drifters), nekton (swimmers) and benthos (bottom-dwellers).

            It’s similar to refuting geocentrism charges against the Bible by showing that even modern astronomers use terms like “sunset” and “sunrise” without being accused of being geocentrists, so why shouldn’t we make the same allowance for the Bible writers.

            It is not sufficient answer to say that “experts in Hebrew” chose the word “bird”. Hebrew experts aren’t experts in animal biology. The KJV chose “bird” and apparently no one sees a need to change it — though they ought to. I am wondering if those who make this objection are seriously proposing that when the Hebrews used this word, they actually had in mind the modern classification scheme which defines “bird” as a warm-blooded creature of a certain class who had feathers.

            Nor will it do to argue that the “Word of God should be perfect at all times and in all circumstances.” If this is how “perfection” is to be understood — if the Bible is supposed to be prepared for our every change in natural understanding of unalterable data — then all we’d have to do to make the Bible “wrong” is change our terminology on things.

            In other words, if the Bible says, “the sky is blue,” we can change our definition of what is “blue” and then say that the Bible is wrong. So would it be seriously suggested that the Bible might have to say, for example:

            This is what the Lord says: “The sky is blue — although Joe Padooski, living in 1874 AD, will define this as others would define ‘green’ and he will call the color in question ‘Fred’.”

            Those who make this sort of complaint don’t want answers. The objection has no legitimacy.

          • Go Away

            Wouldn’t an omnipotent “god” have taken that into account? If “god” is perfect, shouldn’t his/hers/it’s word also be perfect? Why leave something that’s supposed to be that important up to man to mess up?

          • jmichael39

            More red herrings
            You clearly didn’t really read the post did you. Your question was answered in it…read again.

          • Go Away

            I’ve actually stopped reading your replies. Arguing with you is like arguing with a psych patient, you believe your fantasies, and nothing anyone says will change your mind. For me, I prefer reality.

          • jmichael39

            LMAO…You’re the biggest ignoramus I’ve ever met on these sites. You haven’t the capacity to engage in a logical debate…and frankly, I can’t figure out how you don’t constantly walk into walls on a regularly basis or drool your food onto your shoe tops.

          • Go Away

            Maybe you should ask your god(s) for advise. Insults from someone who couldn’t wipe his own butt without help from an invisible sky friend don’t bother me. You’re about as relevant as a bicycle would be to a goldfish.

          • jmichael39

            LMAO and you’re about as intelligent as that goldfish. So go take a bike ride, guppy

          • Go Away

            Nice insult, coming from an amoeba.

          • jmichael39

            keep trying, little one…one of these days you might actually convince a tadpole that you’re smarter than them.

          • Go Away

            Anyone who believes in the invisible sky man is the one who’s stupid.

          • jmichael39

            I’ve already proven the existence of a Creator…the onus is on you to refute my proof. Be well, loser.

          • Go Away

            You haven’t proven anything, except that you know how to rant.

          • jmichael39

            How the heck would you know what I’ve proven in those posts. You can’t even read them.

          • Go Away

            Because when an idiot says something, it’s automatically proven to be wrong. Right, idiot?

          • jmichael39

            LMFAO….now you’re not even trying to sound logical. Another useless troll awash in his own ignorance…sad to see, but predictable.

          • Go Away

            You need medication…

          • jmichael39

            my “medication” is watching faux intellects like you make fools of yourself.

          • Go Away

            “Can’t” and “won’t” are two different words, Einstein!

          • jmichael39

            When you WON’T try…then you CAN’T insist that you can.

          • Go Away

            Your god(s) won’t help humanity, but his/hers/it’s followers continue to claim that he/she/it can.

          • jmichael39

            Another red herring…we were on the topic of the existence of a Creator. You haven’t even attempted to refute my argument for His existence and now you wanna talk about what He does or does not do help humanity? Are you acquiescing to my argument that God really exists, GW? Is that why you’re changing subjects again? If not, let’s return to the debate over His existence and then we can get into what He does or does not do FOR humanity. If you HAVE acquiesced and accept God’s existence, then sure, I’d be happy to discuss what He does and does not do for humanity…and what humanity does and does not do to itself. Let me know…otherwise, take you red herring and stick it in a freezer.

          • Go Away

            You’ve only proven that you’re a moron.

          • jmichael39

            More meaningless drivel from another bigot who can’t even read a simple logical argument and respond in kind. Refute the presentation or continue to expose yourself as the ignoramus I already know you to be. Either way is fine with me.

          • Go Away

            Present something worth reading, and I’ll refute it, idiot!

          • jmichael39

            LMAO…coward…and another logical fallacy…a circuitous argument. If its worth reading I’ll read it. But I haven’t read so it must not be worth reading. Keep going, man, you’re on a pace to cover every logical fallacy in the book by the end of the month.

          • jmichael39

            BTW, GW….you do realize, don’t you, that such a statement as “I wouldn’t expect a Christian to understand anything about logic”, aside from being obscenely ignorant and illogical in and of itself, is utterly bigoted, right?

          • Go Away

            When someone is “bigoted” against bigots, is it really wrong?

          • jmichael39

            What a lovely sense of self-justification. You really are digging a deep hole for yourself.

          • Go Away

            The only “hole” that I see here is… Never mind…

          • jmichael39

            wow…you actually withheld from making an asinine comment…almost.

          • Go Away

            I came here to support the xtian company that doesn’t want to produce an item that runs contrary to the owners beliefs. You’ve succeeded in helping me to question that support. No wonder more and more normal people are coming against delusional xtians.

          • jmichael39

            With ‘support’ like yours, no thanks. I still don’t see you answer my question. But I’m not surprised. I highly doubt you have any notable debate skills.

          • Go Away

            The more you babble, the more I understand why moronic xtians should be forced to follow the law, just like everyone else. Belief in an invisible sky man isn’t a good reason to discriminate.

          • jmichael39

            More logical fallacies…no one here is suggesting Christians NOT obey laws. But we have every right to speak our mind about changing unjust laws. You don’t like that…great…I don’t give a flying rip.

            And yet another logical fallacy…we don’t believe an “invisible sky man”…but you still have time to actually respond to my earlier presentations proving the existence of a Creator. Oh, I forgot, you didn’t really come here to debate…only to act like an ass.

            And yet another logical fallacy…there is no discrimination in this article…at least not over any person. You have never once proved there was. Nor has anyone else. But don’t let that stop you from behaving like a jerk.

          • Go Away

            Like the laws against molesting altar boys? The laws against torture and genocide, that the rosary rattlers ignored during WW!!? And on, and on…

          • jmichael39

            yep…another logical fallacy….red herring anyone
            I don’t use rosaries…sorry to burst your bigoted hateful bubble.

          • Go Away

            You probably also don’t believe that your god lives on the planet kolob either. It’s called a generalization, idiot.

          • jmichael39

            And GENERALLY speaking, you still can’t seem to make a comment without 1) sounding like an ass or 2) making another fallacy. I thought you weren’t reading my posts anymore? Or is just the ones that use more than 2 polysyllabic words in a single sentence?

          • Go Away

            It doesn’t matter which faction of your cult you’re associated with, it still boils down to the fact that you believe in some invisible sky man and require a bronze area book of fairy tales to give you any sense of morality. Most of us stopped believing in imaginary friends when we were children. Don’t you think it’s time for you to grow up?

          • jmichael39

            I have very intelligent and logical reasons for accepting the existence of a Creator. You’d know that if you’d read the presentation I shared with you. Don’t blame me that you’re looking like a foolish bigot for not reading the posts and at least attempting to refute them.

          • Go Away

            No, you don’t. Your “logic” is the same as any psychiatric patient that’s off their meds.

          • jmichael39

            How would you know, you haven’t even read it? You really should take the sage advice that its better to be silent and thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt.

          • Go Away

            How are laws against molesting altar boys a “logical fallacy”? Is it just because they try to stop your NAMBLA friends?

          • jmichael39

            Its a red herring moron…it has nothing to do with me or my faith or the primary topic of this debate. Go read an article of logical fallacies. If I have to sit here and educate in order for us to engage in a logical debate, this gonna get real old real fast.

          • Go Away

            Someone’s “faith” doesn’t concern me. It doesn’t matter if they worship a flying spaghetti monster, the invisible sky man, or one of the many other ancient “gods”. I only object when their delusions cause them to deny others a public accommodation.

          • jmichael39

            well, that’s a nice “belief” in and of itself, GW. And yes, it is a belief…completely subjective and personal since not everyone believes the same way. That being said, what happens when YOUR delusions get in the way of MY accommodations. Now, you’ll forgive me, but that was stated in a way to set you up. You see, GW, this country was founded upon the notion of INDIVIDUAL rights, not the PUBLIC rights. The only time an individual right is superseded is when the actions taken prohibit another individual (not the Public) of their life, liberty or property. You can argue that the owners of this shop did that by rejecting the order to print those t-shirts, but others can also argue their actions do not. We’ll see who’s right when it gets to an actual court and not just in the hands of some bureaucratic commission.

  • Bruce Morrow

    The country is going down the tubes! No government is FORCING a private business to print T-shirts for homosexuals?

    • BarkingDawg

      Yep. We are forcing a private business to follow the law.

      How horrible!!!

      • jmichael39

        no, barky…its going down the tubes because people like you think that its okay for our governments to create laws that force people to reject their religious beliefs.

        • James Grimes

          Amen, Brother.

  • Erin Carol Ponzo

    I find it Absurd that no one has mentioned this IS A CLOTHING COMPANY THAT DESIGNS CHRISTIAN CLOTHING….WITH CHRISTIAN WRITING ON THEIR APPAREL!?! So any case of discrimination is out the window!!!! Would a local brewery have say iin court to force them to print beer tees? Would a Muslim have say in court if they didn’t print a shirt that said praise Allah?WouldWould Hooter’s have a case if they wouldn’t design tube tops and skimpy boy shorts? Uh-NO!

    • SashaC

      Yes, if they refused to print a shirt for a Muslim that said “Praise Allah” they would absolutely be discriminating and risk being sued. If a gay owned shop refused to print a Christian a shirt that said “Praise Jesus” they would also be discriminating. As far as breweries and Hooters, they are not part of a federally protected class, like sexual orientation, race, gender, or religion.

      • BarkingDawg

        A minor point, at this time, sexual orientation is only a federally protected class in those states in the 9th circuit court of appeals.

        Sexual orientation IS, however a protected class under many state and local laws. That is the case here.

        • SashaC

          Yes, valid point! I misspoke. In this case it is a protected class due to state laws. Thank you. 🙂

      • jmichael39

        There you go again with your special rights for ‘protected classes’….watch out, Sasha…you own discrimination is starting to show.

        • SashaC

          There you go with your standard logical fallacies. Twist it all you want to pretend I’m the one discriminating, if it makes you feel better about yourself. You people are experts when it comes to discrimination, after all. Lol!

          • jmichael39

            There’s no fallacy to this logic…you’ve been stating this very fact the entire time…about ‘protected classes’…so live with your choice. Don’t like it, then reject that notion. Otherwise, you made your bed, time to sleep in it.

    • KenS

      Apparently you have not seen my many posts

  • Erin Carol Ponzo

    Would a Christian bookstore be breaking the law of “discrimination” if they refused to sell someone a Koran?

    • SashaC

      No, because they are not in the business of selling Korans, nor do they carry them. This shop is in the business of printing and selling shirts. If the gay customers requested something they do not carry at all, there would be no issue with not providing it.

      • Erin Carol Ponzo

        It is a “””Christian Apparel””” company. They do not sell anything other then Christian apparel. Gay pride is not Christian. Its very cut and dry. Your view would be the same as saying its just a book store, they have to sell me what ever book I want and I want a Koran. …Its called looking to start trouble.

        • SashaC

          Read the article again. There is a difference between a Christian apparel company and a Christian company that offers screen printing services. Service industries are not the same as a shop that simply sells pre made goods.

          • Erin Carol Ponzo

            Check out their website. The name of the company is “Hands On Originals Christian Outfitters” . They went ‘there’ for the exact outcome they received. They knew they had plenty of other places to give their business to without “Christian” in the company name. This was an intentional act.

          • SashaC

            I went to the site and I can understand where you’re coming from. Here’s the issue though. The company offers custom printing services of a design of your choosing or or one you’ve created. It’s right there on the site. If they want to avoid this issue in the future, they need to stop offering those services and sell pre made goods only. Problem solved.

            Let’s use the bookstore analogy, but flip it. Say a gay person has a bookstore where they only sell gay literature, but they also offer a service where you can choose or write a book and they will print it. If you go in asking for a bible to be custom printed, they are obligated to do so, or they will have discriminated. They offer a service and must provide it in adherence with the law. However, if they don’t offer printing services and only sell pre made goods with a gay theme, you have no right to request a bible.

            Also keep in mind that a company cannot be Christian. The owners can be Christian, but a business is not a person and has no religious rights. Just like a store can’t be gay, it can have gay owners.

  • http://NOYB.com Kess

    Sorry, if this stuff is real, and if the “Human Rights Commission” has any true LEGAL authority, SUE THEM… they cannot violate your 1st amendment rights, but ANY business has a right to REFUSE SERVICE to anyone, for whatever reason.

    If you dont like it, dont shop there.

    • SashaC

      It’s not true that a business has the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. I’m not sure why this is so widely believed. Look it up, if you don’t believe me.

    • ashooner

      So, it would be legal for a store to refuse service to Christians? Or white people? The civil rights act is a pretty significant part of US history…

      • Reason2012

        Does a black t-shirt maker who makes t-shirts for white people have to make t-shirts affirming white supremacy? No.

      • jmichael39

        If a gay run t-shirt company were approached by two Christians asking them to print t-shirts that call homosexuality a sin…should they be required to print the t-shirts?

  • Janet Treadway

    They are deliberate targeting Christian base business. How evil is this? They want tolerance but will not extend any to those who do not believe the same way. So this business is the only business they could get their t-shirt printed? So awful. Where is this business rights?

  • Russ

    This company advertises as Christian. This is a case of gays forcing their lifestyle down peoples throats which they swore was not gonna happen if they be allowed to marry!! Well here we are and they are becoming confrontational. The law is unconstitutional because its infringes on religious belief which is protected by the constitution. Just because they choose to live that lifestyle does not mean I should have to accept it. Its a choice that they choose to live that way. This is a case where government is passing law that infringes on religion. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Laws are clearly being enforced that prohibit the free excercise thereof. and as far as these education classes, this is the begining of reeducation camps for anybody who doesnt tow the liberal ideology!!

    • G Backsheer

      I get a little thrill from poorly quoted understanding of Constitutional law and breathy talk about gays putting it “in their faces” and “shoving it down our throats”

      • James Grimes

        If you want to make an atheist angry, just tell him the truth.

    • BarkingDawg

      It doesn’t attest what they advertise as, they still have to follow the local regulations.

      If you don’t like it, change the regulations.

  • MEP1101

    SashaC, what did the Nuremberg trials decide regarding obedience to laws that go against your moral conscience? – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – — – – – – – – – – –
    When politicians in civil government overrule the moral authority of
    their nation’s Religious Majority, they make THEMSELVES the
    authorities of MORALITY as well as Legality. These politicians
    become, in effect, a civil, PRIESTHOOD, and make their GOVERNMENT the
    official RELIGION of the Land.

    The U.S. Government is now dictating what is sexually moral by
    forcing the LGBT-(Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) AGENDA on
    Business and the Military. And with the expressed support for
    abortion by Democrat politicians and the OBAMACARE ABORTION MANDATE,
    the government is ruling that MURDERING BABIES is NOT IMMORAL. It
    has done this in opposition to the RELIGIOUS MORALS of the Majority
    and their DEMOCRATIC VOTE. In this way the U.S. government with the
    complicity of the Marxist, Main Stream Media has become a tyrannical,
    anti-Christian, STATE/CHURCH, DICTATORSHIP, just the opposite of a
    democratic government with checks and balances and separation of
    Church and State. This is a prominent part of the End Times
    Anti-Christ prophesied in the Bible, and right on time.

    • SashaC

      Wow, you crammed every single buzzword you could think of into that diatribe, didn’t you? I’m impressed!

    • G Backsheer

      The all caps-phrases really sold it, guy.

      Felt like I was reading a Tea Party mad-libs

      • James Grimes

        You can do a better job of insulting him.

        • jmichael39

          You’re overly generous, James. I highly doubt he’s intelligent enough to a better job.

          • James Grimes

            Yes, I gave credit where I shouldn’t have. The Useless are beyond belief. A minor incident becomes a world – ending event for them I have already dismissed them for what they are – loudmouth insignificants. I love it when they want to correct me or teach me about something I know much more about than they do. They just aren’t qualified to do so.

            In any event, their rants are entertaining. It seems I am on this site more for the amusement, as my desire to engage with other Christians is almost impossible. I certainly will not engage with The Useless as Proverbs 26:4 advises against doing that.

    • The Last Trump

      Nice job. When you make clear points that the trolls have no witty response to the inevitable result is sarcasm. Apparently these folks didn’t pay close enough attention to how governments in the past have treated their people in a Godless society. They’ll find out soon enough.

    • BarkingDawg

      Godwin’s law strikes again.

  • WorldGoneCrazy
  • Reason2012

    So we can force black t-shirt makers to make t-shirts affirming white supremacy as well?

    The homosexual activists are targeting all Christians businesses to shut them down.

    “How will homosexual marriage affect you?” they said.

    They go into all schools in states where the state religion established by law of homosexual marriage is legally enforced and expose everyone else’s 5 year old kids and grandkids to images and ideas of homosexuality. Parents are not told and the few that find out are not allowed to opt their kids out of the indoctrination. “Shut up – it’s legal now” they say. Google homosexual kindergarten to see the growing list of cases.

    “How will homosexual marriage affect you?” they said.

    Get away from God? Perversion and immorality runs rampant.

    Romans 1:21-28 “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature (creation) more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;”

    • BarkingDawg

      So we can force black t-shirt makers to make t-shirts affirming white supremacy as well?

      ==== sure go ahead

      Wear the shirts in public, as well.

  • Denise Miller Rorabaugh

    I think the printing company should make some shirts that condemn the HRC and the examiner for violating their right to religious freedom and picket in front of the offices. Just as the government allows people of certain faiths to decline military service due to their beliefs, so individuals or private companies should not be compelled to do something against their beliefs. This won’t stop until people of faith start making similar offensive requests & complaints against gay owned businesses.

    • Jeff Levy

      Better make sure that HRC is not a registered trademark symbol before getting oneself into legal issues…

      and it could very well fall under slander

      “I think the printing company should make some shirts that condemn the
      HRC and the examiner for violating their right to religious freedom”

      • Denise Miller Rorabaugh

        It isn’t a company with trade mark. If unions and individuals can protest a company over disputes, then how is this any different? It is the same freedom you want protected as a gay man. Just because I disagree with this ruling doesn’t mean I disagree with your freedom to be employed and respected without discrimination. It’s all about freedom of beliefs, not about hiring practices. If you own the business, you should be able to decline printing something that is hostile to your values as a gay man or a person of faith.

  • janmit63

    I would tell the Kentucky Human Rights Commission examiner to take his order & diversity training & stick them where the good Lord split him because no amount of brainwashing is going to make me make any shirts for this garbage & if he don’t like it thats too bad.

    • BarkingDawg

      Well that’s good, but it’s not your call, is it?

      • jmichael39

        Yep its not his call…just like it wasn’t the call of the black slaves to argue that they were legally the property of someone else.

        And it wasn’t the call of the Jews in Nazi Germany…they had to just accept how they were treated. I mean, it was the law after all.

        Time to grow up, dude. If you wanna defend the rightness of a law that forces people to violate their religious beliefs then at least be man enough to say so. But spare us the old…well, its the law BS

        If you want laws that would force people of one faith to do something in violation of their faith, but not force others to do the very same thing just because you accept one group of people, but not the other, then feel free….I always like watching liberals twitch when their hypocrisy is exposed.

        • janmit63

          1) I am a lady not a man. 2) Being black is not a sin, but homosexuality is a sin. 3) Jews are Gods chosen people, and being Jewish is not a sin either. Oh I am quite grown up & I don’t go around presuming someone is a man when they are a lady, notice I do not ever give you a gender because I do not know if you are male or female. Religion is man made evil, Christianity is from God & is not a religion, therefore it’s the only thing that matters. What they should all really do is show up with Bible’s in hand with every verse that says this is an abomination & as soon as the meeting starts everyone of them should stand up & start reading & then sing Amazing Grace, then tell those running that they refuse to be brainwashed by them & walk out. Case closed.

          • jmichael39

            You might wanna pull your head out from between your crack…and read what I wrote again. I was not addressing YOU. I was addressing Barky. You’d have caught that if you weren’t reading with a preconceived seething anger. Because I said, “Yep its not his call”…in my very first sentence. A comment made directly in response to Barky’s “it’s not your call, is it?”.

            That being said…I choose to ignore the rest of your useless rant.

          • janmit63

            1) this is my post so I will address whatever I choose so if you do not like it then stop posting on my post. 2) BarkingDawg was responding to me & you responded to him but was referring to me, so I set you straight. So get over it.

          • jmichael39

            “1) this is my post so I will address whatever I choose so if you do not like it then stop posting on my post. ” – and exactly where did I remotely say, whether implicitly or explicitly, that you shouldn’t be making any post? I pointed out where I wasn’t addressing and thus wasn’t calling YOU a ‘dude’.

            Second, if you don’t want to have others participate in your little one-on-one with Barky, then take it private. Otherwise, get used to the idea that this is a public forum and anyone has a right to participate to whatever degree they want.

            “2) BarkingDawg was responding to me & you responded to him but was referring to me, so I set you straight. So get over it.” – I was NOT referring to you. I wrote my post, and am pretty sure I know whom I referring to. To take your “setting you straight” and shove it.

      • janmit63

        I never said it was & I doubt any of these Christians are going to take their brainwashing bullcrap.

  • Richard French

    The fascist pigs of the homosexual agenda are no where near finished smearing their excrement in peoples faces.

  • BarkingDawg

    What is it about the concept of public accommodation laws that has some people so confused?

    • Asemodeus

      Some christians view, incorrectly, that their religion allows them to exempt themselves from any law they want. Which is why you hear them moan about such events like discrimination with public businesses. They think they are above the law and get offended when reality shows up and punches them in the neck.

    • Gary

      Public accommodation laws infringe on the freedom of association. The law should not try to force people together who don’t want to be together. Business transactions should be voluntary for everyone involved. If a homosexual printer did not want to print T shirts with something Christian written on them, they should be free to decline that business.

      • BarkingDawg

        So, you want to go back to the days of segregated lunch counters and all.

        Nice.

  • BarkingDawg

    In related news, Ken Ham’s “Arc Park” project gets another setback as the state of Kentucky threatens to pull the projects tax breaks. It seems that the project has been engaged in discriminatory hiring practices.

    What is it about Kentucky?

    • Asemodeus

      Conservatism is what is wrong with it.

  • http://www.blogtalkradio.com/faithwalkamerica Jason Hawes

    By the way, to truly demonstrate discrimination against people, for their sexual orientation or otherwise, one should have to show a burden of proof and sufficient evidence to show that there was animus to these people due to their sexual orientation. Given that Blaine Adamson has reportedly printed shirts for gays before, it’s hard to find any sort of animus toward gays. Apparently, the local Human Rights Commission decided to go pc and rather conveniently ignore that. This isn’t a matter of “discrimination”. This is a free speech issue in which Adamson was asked to produce and in essence make a statement that he did not agree with or believe in it. Then the courts and a “human rights commission” said, “Too bad, your free speech rights don’t matter. Neither do your religious beliefs.” He hated and discriminated against these gays so much that he even made personal arrangements, which of course he DIDN’T HAVE TO DO, to have the shirts printed by some one else. Yeah, I’m glad the founding fathers would be “ashamed” of my standing for the freedoms they laid down in the constitution instead of bowing down to bleeding heart political correctness in which, if you don’t think, act, and march in step with what society decides on a whim is moral, you need to be reeducated by the state. This country and the secular progressives pushing the agenda have collectively fallen on their heads. God bless and keep His own, and God help the rest.

    • SashaC

      It’s pretty easy to prove when you people keep opening your mouths and volunteering the info, as was the case here. He said he wasn’t printing the shirts because they were for a gay event. What more proof do you need?

      • http://www.blogtalkradio.com/faithwalkamerica Jason Hawes

        I’m glad Sasha that everyone can see for themselves that you approve of, and are fine with living in a country in which the government or some bureaucracy of the government compels and demands that a person basically make a statement that they do not believe in or support- and that if they refuse to do so, well then it’s “diversity training” for them. I suppose that’s the country progressing in your skewed world view. No one in this country should HAVE to do that- not in a truly free country. I hate Planned Parenthood with an undying passion and love the story of Abby Johnson and how she left there and how she then went on and started 40 Days for Life. But if Abby Johnson were to go back to Planned Parenthood and say, “Can you help promote our event?”, if and when Planned Parenthood not only says no but HELL NO, I’m fine with that. I know that’s not a perfect analogy, because I know there’s no real discrimination in that, based on any “class” of people anyway. But, the main point being, people shouldn’t be forced to go against their beliefs. And we should be ADULT enough not to say, “Okay, now I’m going to sue you, or now I’m going to file a complaint and see you destroyed.” But instead say, “Okay, you don’t like what I do, or what I believe, or who I am. I can probably find someone else who does, or at least doesn’t care so I’ll do business with them.”

        Again, what part of HE STILL ARRANGED FOR SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED FOR THEM is lost here? He did everything that he felt his beliefs allowed him to do. As a matter of fact, I’d say he went above and beyond what he should have had to do- and the shirts were printed. The gay organization had the service provided to them and Adamson didn’t have to violate his beliefs and be doing what he felt was partaking in sin. Amongst mature people, that’s good enough 98% of the time. Was it good enough here! NO! He had to be punished and made to suffer and be corrected because he dared to stand for his beliefs.

        I notice 2 other things. You actually made a comment saying to Ken I believe that if he was right and you were wrong, the court wouldn’t have ruled the way they did. In response to that- this may or may not be over. We do have an appeals process and maybe even a lawsuit that could be filed against the appropriate party or parties in response.

        You also said there are no “Christian businesses but there are Christian individuals.” Well, the HIGHEST court in the land, which doesn’t get everything right these days by any means, still ruled that even corporations (closely held corporations to be precise) can operate within the context and according to their religious beliefs. Thus, Hobby Lobby can decide not to offer or pay for things like ella or Plan B. Under that same pretext, if a privately held corporation can choose not to provide certain contraceptives due to their religious conscience, a small business owner should have the same right not to do something that violates his or her religious conscience. But again, with this element in this country, it’s not about even “fairness”, “tolerance” or “equal rights”. It’s about stamping out and silencing the Christian view and the Christian morality in this country- making it outmoded, outdated, and inappropriate so that we can do whatever feels good to us without any annoying consequences or twinges of conscience-either within ourselves or from us pesky Christians who cling to our bibles- and even for many their guns.

        • SashaC

          Is there a tl/dr for this? Maybe Cliff’s Notes? My goodness!

          You’re still not grasping the difference between individual rights and your responsibilities as a business owner. I can’t keep repeating the same thing and expecting a different result.

  • GetHubNub

    The Court’s way out of line here.

    • Asemodeus

      By following the law?

  • Jack Parker

    Gay propaganda. This is nothing but an attack on Christians by homosexuals who are looking for 1) press, 2) Christians to sue when they purposely choose businesses that OPENLY advertise themselves as Christian-based. There are plenty of gay-owned and gay-friendly businesses, but these people purposely look for Christian businesses to harass and destroy.

  • Sherry

    This is wrong as a Christian they cannot force us to go against our faith , and they are breaking the Ky law and needs to be repealed. From the Kentucky constitution, Sec 5, Right of Religious Freedom: in part states ” ….and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching. No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. ”

    They are violating the law and stomping on this man’s constitutionally protected religious right of conscience. Local ordinance does not override the Kentucky Constitution’s Bill of Rights. This screams for an appeal…

  • BarkingDawg

    BTW, the State of West Virginia has announced that they will no longer fight the court challenge to their SSM ban.

  • John

    This is so wrong.

  • Eggshan

    Just print the t – shirts (or bake the cake / make the dress), take the sodomites’ money (they have plenty), thank them for their patronage, and let them know (with a smile) as they prance out the door to go sodomize each other that 100% of the proceeds from their order will be donated (IN THE SODOMITES’ NAME) to an organization that supports / promotes real marriage / families, like Family Research Council etc.

    • SashaC

      Who cares? Donate it to whomever you like. It won’t make their marriage any less legal, or stop the government from protecting them. They get their cake/shirt/dress and you waste your profits, donating them to an organization that is powerless to stop gay rights from advancing, as we have seen quite a bit lately.

      • Eggshan

        “who cares”? Sodomites do! “donating to an organization that is powerless”, if those organizations are so “powerless”, why did the sodomy lobby throw a fit that would put a tired, hungry, teething two year old to shame over Chic – Filet donating money to them, or call for the job of the Firefox CEO for donating to such a “powerless” organization?

        • SashaC

          My point is that no amount of donating is going to stop nationwide gay marriage or gay equality, at this point. It’s happening and it won’t be long.

          • Eggshan

            If two or more perverts want to pretend that sodomizing each other constitutes a marriage and are willing to pay the State for a license to validate their delusion(s) / mental illness, I say let them! No one but other mentally ill perverts / activists consider them REALLY married anyway.

            The real way to combat the homosexual / sodomy lobby is to lobby and fight to keep age of consent laws in in place and strong, lobby for tougher laws / penalties against child grooming / molestation (the REAL goal of the sodomy “rights” movement) and work to keep / strengthen parents’ rights, so parents can continue to protect their children from these animals.

            “scratch the average homosexual and you’ll find a pedophile” – Kevin Bishop.

          • SashaC

            So you support gay marriage now!? Wonderful, so glad I changed your mind! Welcome to the team! Free sodomy for all! 😀

          • Eggshan

            changed my mind from what?

          • Gary

            There is no such thing as “gay marriage”. Gay equality means all homosexuals are equally disgusting.

          • SashaC

            Too bad the courts disagree with you.

          • Gary

            The courts are wrong.

          • SashaC

            Tell that to the courts.

          • Gary

            We will. In our own way.

          • SashaC

            That sounds kinda creepy Gary. Is god going to call on you to build Gary’s Ark?

          • Gary

            No.

  • Eggshan

    I would like to see (just one time) some sodomites try and pull this on a business owned by Muslims or devout Jews, just one time!

    Sodomites pull this type of BS on Christian owned businesses because they know Christians won’t fight back, they would NEVER pull this on a business owned by Muslims or devout Jews because they know those folks WILL fight back, and how!.

    • SashaC

      Christians have been fighting back. They’ve just been losing. What do you think this article is about?

      • Eggshan

        “Christians have been fighting back”, not the way those other folks would / do. Tell you what, go on over to ME (their territory) and start pushing your filth, see what I’m talking about.

        • SashaC

          I have a speaking suspicion you’re one of those people who don’t know that your typical American Muslim is not the same as a Muslim extremist.

  • Eggshan

    The whole “gay marriage” farce is NOTHING but a cloak / smokescreen from behind which the homosexual / sodomy lobby works their real agenda, which is grooming / preying on children.

    “scratch the average homosexual and you’ll find a pedophile” – Kevin Bishop

  • Eggshan

    For some good news, check out the results of the latest Pew Research poll on support for the homosexual mental illness, support is DECLINING and fast, people are starting to wake up to what these perverts are really all about.

    “scratch the average homosexual and you’ll find a pedophile” – Kevin Bishop.

    • SashaC

      Keep desperately grasping at those straws…

      • Eggshan

        Likewise!

        • SashaC

          My cause saw a lot of PROGRESS this week. How about yours? 😉

          • Eggshan

            and what do you think my “cause” is?

          • Gary

            You are closer to Hell now than you were when the week started.

          • SashaC

            Lol! I’m an atheist. That’s like threatening me with the boogeyman. Unlike you, I grew up and put aside fairy tales and scary campfire stories.

          • Gary

            What you believe changes nothing.

          • SashaC

            Neither does what you believe. 😉

          • Gary

            Your eternal destiny is not determined by what I believe.

          • SashaC

            You’re right. Only the Flying Spaghetti Monster can judge me. rAmen!

  • Eggshan

    Homosexuals represent 2% of the population (being generous and rounding up) and account for 30% of the child molestations.

    Which implies that Heterosexuals consist of the remaining 98% of the population. This is simple subtraction, nothing overly complicated. (100% – 2% = 98%)

    It also implies that the heterosexual population commits 70% of the child molestations. Again this is simple subtraction. (100% – 30% = 70%)

    If homosexuals consisted of 4.67% of the population they would molest the exact same amount of children as the heterosexuals. The grade school math becomes more complicated, it involves ratios and cross multiplication. (2 * 70 / 30 = 4.67)

    That means that homosexuals are 21 times statistically more likely to molest children than heterosexuals

    • NoGod4U

      74% of Prison inmates are Christian… does that statistic imply anything for you?

  • Richard French

    Should a Christian refuse service to a sinner? No. Should a Christian warn the wicked that there is a coming judgement for those who live sinful lifestyles? Yes.

  • Seth Murray

    On what basis are the owners and employees of the company in question obligated to abide by someone else’s opinion regarding what they should or should not do?

    I’d simply ignore this “commission” and continue working productively. If the commission thinks that a company should print anything for anyone, then they are free to start their own print company and do just that — what they are not free to do is to force other people to abide by their opinions.

  • Nabukuduriuzhur

    I wonder if the Kentucky HRC realizes what they sound like when they breach both the First Amendment, and the 1948 UN Fundamental Declaration of Human Rights?

    Pretty bad when an outfit ignores the law in order to do something they know is wrong.

  • Gary

    If I were made to attend “sensitivity training”, it would be an exasperating experience for whoever was conducting that training. To say I would be disruptive would be an understatement. Many of us are getting tired of the wicked making the rules.

    • NoGod4U

      And an unruly behavior is the appropriate Christian response?

      • Gary

        Why would disrupting something that is designed to promote evil be unchristian?

        • NoGod4U

          Riiigght… because learning how to love your neighbor isn’t something Christians are really interested in.

          • Gary

            Endorsing the evil your neighbor wants to do is not loving your neighbor.

  • Gary

    The state of Kentucky., or at least this commission, has decided that the right of homosexuals to not be discriminated against is more important than the freedom of religion.

    • NoGod4U

      If they are a commercial printer open to the public and print whatever a customer provides them to print then a design on a pro-homosexual design on a T-shirt in no way takes away their “freedom of religion” any more than if they were against Devil Rock and Roll music and I put in an order for an AC/DC T-shirt or a Beer T-Shirt etc. Has their religious freedom been taken away because they print those kind of shirts that also may not fit their Christian worldview? Of course not… You are right though on one part, the state of KY has ruled that the right for an individual to not be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation is more important than religious bigotry…. same as it was in the 60’s and 70’s with Jim Crow, you’re on the losing side of history my friend.

      • Gary

        1. I am not your friend.
        2. Forcing Christians to do things that violate their Christian beliefs does violate their freedom of religion.
        3. Christians have had about all of this kind of stuff we are going to tolerate.

        • NoGod4U

          1. No worries I use the phrase in a very general sense… you’ve very clearly shown your lack of compassion for others so the word friend is probably a psychological trigger of some sort. My apology.
          2. Where do you draw the line on violating “Christian beliefs”? I reference you again to do a history study of Jim Crow laws which during that time would have been argued the exact same way by the religious, by allow interracial marriage or equality they were being forced to violate what they deemed as their “Christian beliefs”… if you doubt that search YouTube for some Texas preachers who still preach the biblical foundations of segregation.
          3. I’m not sure is this last one is a threat of some sort? Death to homosexuals by Stoning as in the OT perhaps?

          • Gary

            Jim Crow laws mandated the government enforced separation of the races. That is as wrong as forcing people together who don’t want to be together. Point 3 was to indicate that we are not going to continue to tolerate the legalization and promotion of evil. Our tolerance is not a bottomless well.

          • LinCA

            The well of tolerance for anything other than those exactly like you is clearly no deeper than a shallow puddle.

            The wells that seem bottomless are those that hold your ignorance, intolerance, bigotry and hate.

          • Gary

            You are right about our “well of tolerance”. It is very shallow. I don’t oppose you out of ignorance. Just the opposite. I oppose you because I am informed of your wickedness.

          • LinCA

            Isn’t your opposition based predominantly based on your religious views? Aren’t you opposed to equality based on your interpretation of your holy book (the bible, I presume)?

            If so, then yes, you are opposing me based on ignorance. Your entire religion is based on nothing but ignorance. It is based on a belief in a creature that is no more real than the Tooth Fairy. It is nothing more than ancient superstitious nonsense. ignorant goat herders, afraid of the dark, unable to explain the sun and moon rising and setting, ignorant about thunder and lightning, making up stories about sky creatures.

            It’s pathetic that in 2014 any adult still clings to such infantile garbage.

          • Gary

            Even if that were true, my beliefs would be every bit as valid as yours.

          • LinCA

            Uh, no. I shed my beliefs in fictional characters before I was 10.

          • Eggshan

            Yeah, you folks are soooo enlightened! You have miskated a bodily opening designed for the safe / efficient expulsion of waste for a sex organ. Got news for you perverts, there’s no uterus inside a man’s colon.

          • LinCA

            Wow, really? You managed to finish elementary school? Did they give you a gold sticker? You seem to be challenged to comprehend simple posts.

            You wrote, “Yeah, you folks are soooo enlightened!
            At least I don’t cling to ignorant Bronze Age mythology. If you want to call that “enlightened”, go ahead.

            You wrote, “You have miskated a bodily opening designed for the safe / efficient expulsion of waste for a sex organ.
            Nope, I haven’t. I’m well aware of the primary and secondary functions of human body parts.

            You wrote, “Got news for you perverts, there’s no uterus inside a man’s colon.
            That’s not news. It does make me wonder why you seem to be so fixated on male homosexual acts. Are you sure you don’t have secret homosexual desires? Your obsession with it makes me doubt that you are straight.

          • Eggshan

            No one is “fixated” on anything, that’s just your Alinsky way of trying to get me to defend myself against why I’m supposedly “obsessed” with homosexual acts, so I won’t have time to point out the disgusting, dangerous, disease mongering behavior you perverts CHOOSE to engage in.

            “Discourage anti-gay [dissent] by linking and calling all those that have opposing opinions to latent homosexuality.”(page 227) – After the Ball, by homosexual / pedophile activists Kirk and Madsen.

          • LinCA

            You are the one who keeps coming referring to one particular kind of male homosexual activity. You are the one that is clearly preoccupied with it.

            I just call a duck, a duck.

          • Eggshan

            “call a duck, a duck” eh? You know what HIV was originally (and appropriately) called? It was called GRID (gay related immune disease), not THAT my sodomie friend is “calling a duck a duck”.

          • LinCA

            Nah, that’s just ignorance, both by those that suggested the acronym and by you for not bothering with reality.

          • Eggshan

            “ignorance”, go tell the CDC that, according to them despite being less than 2% of the population (1.6%), those who CHOOSE to engage in homosexual activity accounted for more than 30% of hepatitis cases, 60% of syphilis cases, and almost 80% of new HIV cases in 2010, and 1 in 5 of them in major u.s. cities is crawling with HIV

          • LinCA

            That’s the neighborly love from christians for you. By their hate they forced an entire section of the population into hiding what they are. It’s no wonder that they are reluctant to seek treatment.

            A similar effect is seen with teenagers who are raised in strict christian environments. They tend to be taught that sex is bad without proper education about protection and safe sex. The result is significantly higher rates of STDs, pregnancies and abortions.

          • Eggshan

            I see, so the reason that those who CHOOSE to engage in homosexuality are crawling with disease is “Christians” fault, not the result of the choices sodomites make?

          • LinCA

            Yes pretty much, as virtually all that ails society is traceable to christian meddling. Religion really is a cancer. I hope we can implement a cure soon.

          • Eggshan

            Better work on that cure for HIV (GRID) first.

          • LinCA

            No need wait. Curing religion will actually speed up finding cures for other illnesses.

          • Eggshan

            I see, so the reason that those who CHOOSE to engage in homosexuality are crawling with disease is “Christians” fault, not the result of the choices sodomites make?

  • Earl of Rochester

    It has been suggested that pro-gay groups have been specifically targeting Christian businesses in an effort to raise awareness of this so called discrimination. If that is the case then I wonder whether there are grounds for those affected to claim entrapment?

    • LinCA

      They are not enticed to break the law. They are specifically asked to follow it. There’s no entrapment.

      Exposing unlawful behavior is perfectly acceptable.

  • Valley Smith

    So, as a printer, I would be required to print obscenities on a shirt?

  • Eggshan

    NAMBLA was a member of ILGA (international lesbian gay alliance) for 15 years (15 years) and marched in many sodomy “pride” parades.

  • Eggshan

    You only see sodomites pulling this BS on Christians specifically because they know Christians wont’ fight back and represent a “soft target”. You would NEVER see these sodomites walk into a business owned by Muslims or devout Jews and demand that they validate sodomy, because they know those folks WILL fight back, and how.

  • LinCA

    If the owner feels his beliefs prevent him from operating a business within the law, his religious freedom gives him the right to abstain from operating such a business. He doesn’t get to pick which laws to follow, and which to ignore.

    The question is why anyone would let ancient superstition and folklore get in the way of being a decent human being.

    • Eggshan

      Since when did promoting sodomy become “decent”?

      • LinCA

        Do you struggle with suppressed homosexual attraction? There is a strong correlation between homophobia and homosexual arousal. You seem to fit the profile.

        Not discriminating is the decent thing to do. Printing t-shirts doesn’t promote anything.

        • Gary

          Well, I see you have exhausted your comebacks. Accusing the opponents of homosexuality of being closeted homosexuals is the last line of defense for sodomites.

          • LinCA

            It’s science (so I don’t expect you to understand), but take a look anyway:
            www . ncbi . nlm . nih . gov / pubmed / 8772014

          • Gary

            Funny, no opponent of Christianity is ever accused of being a “closeted Christian”. No opponent of Islam is ever accused of being a “closeted Muslim”. Only opponents of homosexuality are accused to secretly being what they oppose. LOL.

          • LinCA

            The differences, of course, are obvious.

            Unlike homosexuality, identifying as a christian doesn’t put you in a persecuted minority in this country. It is perfectly safe to openly proclaim to be a christian. There is little chance of being ostracized for being a christian. The worst that will happen is that you are called out for being ignorant on a discussion board. there really is no reason to hide your christianity. There is no reason to rail against it to hide the fact that you are secretly one.

            Christianity is also not an intrinsic attribute. Religious beliefs are learned and clinging to them a choice. You can be cured from christianity, just like you can be cured from believing in the Easter Bunny. Once someone stops believing in their imaginary friends, they typically don’t go back.

          • Eggshan

            When was the last time it was not safe for a sodomite to openly proclaim their penchant for sodomy in this country?

          • LinCA

            Do you have a problem with reading comprehension?

            I said that gays could not be open about being themselves in this country. Christians, on the other hand, have little to fear for openly proclaiming their penchant for sodomy in this country.

          • Eggshan

            So… when was the last time it was not safe for a sodomite to be “open about being themselves” in this country?

          • LinCA

            You are dense, aren’t you? How often do I need to repeat and rephrase that before it sinks in? Again, christians can safely be open about what they are. they won’t get beaten up for wearing a cross around their necks. They won’t get yelled at for carrying a bible. It’s pretty safe for them to be themselves.

          • Eggshan

            As the stats I cite above show, you perverts are more than safe to “be open about who you are”. You perverts are not concerned with “safety”, you want validation of your mental illness / fecal fetish because you can’t validate / reconcile your own CHOICES with / to yourselves.

          • LinCA

            Your “stats” are BS, and the only group with a mental illness is the one that still has imaginary friends as adults.

          • Eggshan

            I LOVE how you perverts try so hard to peddle the false narrative that the only people who have an aversion to a CHOSEN lifestyle / behavior crawling with disease (including, but certainly not limited to HIV), depression / mental illness, domestic violence, suicide, child molestation, rampant drug and alcohol abuse and the willful ingesting of feces are those who have “imaginary friends”, as if so called atheists are cool with disease mongering, violence, child abuse, addiction and eating poo.

          • Eggshan

            You perverts can stop with the victim narrative, according to the FBI, The evidence for an epidemic of crimes against homosexual persons is non-existent

            Of every 20,000 murders, 4 were declared “hate crimes” against homosexuals (0.02%)

            Of every 20,000 aggravated assaults, 4 are “hate crimes” against homosexuals (0.02%)

            Of every 20,000 robberies, 2 are “hate crimes” against homosexuals (0.01%)

            Of every 80,000 rapes, less than 1 is a “hate crime” against homosexuals (0.00123%)

            Oh, and by the way, “Name-calling” rates equally with an assault in hate crime statistics.

          • LinCA

            While I have no doubt that, even if you were able to comprehend it, you’d reject it out of hand because it doesn’t fit your biases, here is some FBI data on hate crimes. It shows you are full of it.
            www . fbi . gov / about-us / cjis / ucr / hate-crime / 2012 / topic-pages / victims / victims_final

          • Eggshan

            Where you able to read the last line of the post you responded to?

          • LinCA

            Yes, I read it. That makes you guilty, doesn’t it?

          • Eggshan

            You along with me.

          • LinCA

            Where did I call anybody names?

            Pointing out ignorance isn’t name-calling. Pointing out that religious beliefs are no different from believing in the Tooth Fairy isn’t either. I haven’t even called anyone a “christian” as I would consider that a pretty obnoxious insult.

          • Eggshan

            Your hand (or should I say slip) is showing. You DO realize that Christians and their “tooth fairy” are not the only ones with an aversion to to a CHOSEN lifestyle / behavior crawling with disease (including, but certainly not limited to HIV), depression / mental illness, domestic violence, suicide, child molestation, rampant drug and alcohol abuse and the willful ingesting of feces, you really think so called atheists are cool with disease mongering, violence, addiction, child abuse, addiction and eating poo?

          • LinCA

            I know that some christian groups oppose the more virulent ones, but that doesn’t seem to make the abuses any less prevalent. Christianity in this country enjoys a special status. They are free to pollute the minds of their children with their fairy tales.

            And no, I’m not OK with the abuse that christians perpetrate on the rest of society. It’s a cancer that needs to be cured. Unfortunately the willingness to educate the ignorant is lacking, but I do what I can.

        • Eggshan

          “Discourage anti-gay [dissent] by linking and calling all those that have opposing opinions to latent homosexuality.”(page 227) – After the Ball, by homosexual / pedophile activists Kirk and Madsen.

  • Eggshan

    The homosexual / sodomy “rights” movement has NOTHING to do with “equality” or “civil rights”, it has to do with homosexauls promoting sodomy to and grooming / preying on children.

    Homosexuals represent 2% of the population (being generous and rounding up) and account for 30% of the child molestations.

    Which implies that Heterosexuals consist of the remaining 98% of the population. This is simple subtraction, nothing overly complicated. (100% – 2% = 98%)

    It also implies that the heterosexual population commits 70% of the child molestations. Again this is simple subtraction. (100% – 30% = 70%)

    If homosexuals consisted of 4.67% of the population they would molest the exact same amount of children as the heterosexuals. The grade school math becomes more complicated, it involves ratios and cross multiplication. (2 * 70 / 30 = 4.67)

    That means that homosexuals are 21 times statistically more likely to molest children than heterosexuals

  • Eggshan

    The homoseuxal / sodomy lobby has cloaked their push to groom / prey on children in the rhetoric of civil rights, it’s a clever tactic because who could be against “civil rights”, this way they can lump anyone opposed to sodomy / child molestation with a slaveowner or Klansman.

  • Eggshan

    Let’s say you have a guy who believed (and had believed his whole life) that he was a dog. This guy whines, bribes and threatens the federal government to force the States to allow him to purchase a pet license for himself in order to validate his insanity. Now, who (in their right mind) would believe (despite his “valid” license) that this guy was a dog?

    If two or more sodomites are delusional enough to believe that sodomizing each other constitutes a marriage and are willing to pay the State to issue them a license to validate their mental illness, I say let them, no one but other mentally ill perverts and their activists actually considered them married.

    The real way to deal with the homosexual / sodomy blitzkrieg is to lobby / fight to keep age of consent laws in place and strong, push to toughen penalties / laws against child grooming / molestation (Children are what the homosexual / sodomy lobby is really after), fight to strengthen parents’ rights so we can continue to protect our children from these animals.

    “scratch the average homosexual and you’ll find a pedophile” – Kevin Bishop.

  • Eggshan

    Homosexuals routinely admit (even brag) that they cannot control their own behavior and have “no choice” in their own actions, that’s why despite being less than 2% of the population (1.6%), those who CHOOSE to engage in homosexual activity accounted for more than 30% of hepatitis cases, 60% of syphilis cases, and almost 80% of new HIV cases in 2010, and 1 in 5 of them in major u.s. cities is crawling with HIV, by their own admission, they just can’t control themselves.

    • GinnyLee

      It is a pathetic way to get through life. I believe that it is a controlling spirit. Something to be fought against and repelled, and not accommodated and welcomed in to the midst of a society.

  • nojack

    It is only until all of the Sodomites are burning in eternal Hell that this issue will be resolved. Leave your perversion and turn your life over to Jesus. It would be the wisest act you have ever committed. Otherwise the consequences will be HELL, literally.

    • LinCA

      Why not the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny or Harry Potter, or any other fictional character? Are you sure that the destination is hell? I thought it would be Azkaban.

  • Rev Donald Spitz

    Homosexuality should be criminalized. Homosexuality is a crime
    against God and against the Holy Bible. After reading this story I know why God
    wrote:

    Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of
    them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their
    blood shall be upon them.

  • Pax Humana

    Give me a few minutes with the members of this commission and they will NEVER try this with this company, or any other company, EVER again in their lives. These Lucifer worshiping jerks have addresses and they WILL be found by someone in their lives.

  • http://EdenPoliticalCartoons.com/ David John Eden

    Wait. Is this a govt run business? Or a privately run free enterprise? There are no doubt a dozen other T-shirt shops in town that would gladly print their crap. But nooooooo– They gotta push it, gotta cram it, gotta shove it right up our… The Militant Gaystopo must be stopped. Pray for, vote for, elect honest, sane, wise judges & leaders.

  • 7HillsVet

    The First Amendment gives us the right to Freedom of Speech, it does not imply we must speak, either verbally or in print, what others demand. This HRC member is wrong!

  • Richard O. Mann

    The reprogramming has started. You do not think right, so you must attend diversity training to be properly programed on how and what to think. I wonder what the consequences would be if they do not attend the program? Jail time? Fines? And you thought it could not happen here.

    • GinnyLee

      Yes. And just who is the “Urban Rights Commission”? Who gives them any authority? ‘Sounds like a local group to ‘accommodate’ the misfits and whiners – in the name of ‘diversity’, or ‘inclusion’ – two words that are slowly tearing down our good citizens of America.

  • maingate

    Let the homosexuals go to a printing company of their OWN kind!

  • GinnyLee

    It’s the same outrageous motive as the “couple” in Colorado had – to cause trouble, and take down a long-time, American, small business – all for the sake of “their own” way of thinking….”Me, mine, us”, and no more.

    This catering to the LGTB crowd is causing our country to go backwards. It is confusion, and it is not the “American Way”.

  • Dan Greenie

    Legal appeal and taking it to the USSC inevitably. Forcing a business to provide product or services is an absurdity, socially, Constitutionally, and morally. Have seen this nonsense before. Not panicing, just watching it play out in the courts.