State Human Rights Commission Appeal Seeks to Force Christian Business to Print ‘Gay Pride’ T-Shirts

Hands OnLEXINGTON, Ky. — A court battle continues over the right of a Christian business not to print t-shirts for a “gay pride” event in conflict with its biblical beliefs after the Kentucky Human Rights Commission recently filed an appeal in an effort to force the company to comply with its demands.

As previously reported, the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization of Lexington (GLSO) had wanted the Kentucky-based Hand On Originals–a company that identifies as “Christian outfitters” on the home page of its website–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, GLSO filed a complaint with the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Human Rights Commission.

“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.”

HRC examiner Greg Munson ruled in October 2014 that Hands On Originals violated the law by not printing the shirts for the event. The company was then ordered to undergo diversity training so that it would not decline to print such messages in the future.

But Hands on Originals filed an appeal with the Fayette Circuit Court via its legal counsel, contending that the ruling violated its constitutional right to freedom of religion and its freedom of expression.

In April, the court reversed Munson’s ruling, noting that the company regularly does business with homosexuals, and so the decision not to print the shirts was not based on any person’s sexuality, but rather the message that the company would be forced to convey.

The court noted that from 2010-2012 Hands on Originals declined 13 orders from various groups because of the message that was to be printed.

  • Connect with Christian News

“Those print orders that were refused by HOO included shirts promoting a strip club, pens promoting a sexually explicit video and shirts containing a violence-related message,” it explained. “There is further evidence in the Commission record that it is standard practice within the promotional printing industry to decline to print materials containing messages that the owners do not want to support.”

“Nonetheless, the Commission punished HOO for declining to print messages advocating sexual activity to which HOO and its owners strongly oppose on sincerely held religious grounds,” the court continued. “The Commission’s order substantially burdens HOO’s and its owners’ free exercise of religion, wherein the government punished HOO and its owners by its order for their sincerely held religious beliefs. This is contrary to established constitutional law.”

As the Human Rights Commission has appealed the ruling to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, several religious rights organization are fighting back.

“GLSO admits that it would reject a religious organization that wanted to set up a booth condemning homosexuality at the pride festival,” the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty wrote in its friend of the court brief on Thursday. “Such conduct should be protected, just as a pro-choice printer’s refusal to print religious pro-life messages should be protected, and just as a gay photographer’s refusal to photograph a religious anti-gay rally should be protected.”

It notes that even a self-proclaimed lesbian-owned screen printer shop in Kentucky has come out in support of Hands On Originals.

“No one should be forced to do something against what they believe in. If we were approached by an organization such as the Westboro Baptist Church, I highly doubt we would be doing business with them, and we would be very angry if we were forced to print anti-gay t-shirts,” Diane DiGeloromo, an owner of BMP T-Shirts, told the Blaze last November. “This isn’t a gay or straight issue. This is a human issue.”

University of Virginia Law Professor Douglas Laycock and Stoll Keenon Ogden PLLCS joined in the brief. The religious liberties organization Alliance Defending Freedom is handling the main arguments in the case.


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
  • The Last Trump

    My oh my, how LGBT supporters do love them some Christian businesses!
    Looks to me like they are the ONLY places they choose to shop.
    Must be a coincidence.

    The “we just want to be left alone” crowd sure do like to be on the attack though, don’t they?
    Just can’t seem to keep these folks out of courtrooms. Well, when they’re NOT constantly shopping at all those Christian businesses that is.

    • Kyler Phoenix

      Really? How did you arrive at that conclusion? HOW would gay people know one way or the other before entering?

      • MamaBear

        In this case, the webpage openly advertised customized Christian apparel.
        Many Christians in my area put a small fish in their ads as a sign it is a Christian owned business to encourage fellow Christians to patronize them. I suspect that is a pretty widespread practice and is one thing being used by gays to find who to target.

        • WorldGoneCrazy

          Nice rebuttal. 🙂

        • Kyler Phoenix

          So they should know that they were bigoted based on a fish? Show me proof. Do you know how stupid that sounds?

          • MamaBear

            It has been a Christian symbol for about 2000 years. I’m surprised you are not familiar with it. Even if you are not, that does not mean there are not those within the homosexual community who do and can use it as a way to identify and target Christian businesses. It would be interesting to know how many Christian businesses targeted had somehow identified themselves as Christian. I do not think this is random.
            The Greek for fish ιχθύς is an acronym for Jesus Christ Son of God Savior.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            I am familiar with it. You didn’t understand my question huh? So, by looking at the symbol, they were to understand that the owner was bigoted? The symbol represents hate and bigotry?

          • MamaBear

            Apparently you think that not wanting to participate in something the Bible plainly spells out as sin is to be bigoted. How very “tolerant” of you! Ever hear of the First Amendment? Do you demand a Jewish caterer serve ham? That women from religions that cover their hair (Muslim, Orthodox Jews, and others) take off their head scarves if you find that inconvenient? Or is it just when the sacred WANTS (cakes, flowers, and t-shirts have gone beyond rights) of homosexuals clash with Christian Biblical beliefs that you call it hate and bigotry?

          • Kyler Phoenix

            Those are odd logical fallacy arguments. The Bible is a book of stolen myths that ends in a blood sacrifice. It has nothing to do with our laws. You didn’t make it very far in school did you?

          • calhou

            So then you would demand that a kosher deli serve you ham…..and are ready to sue the owners when they do not based on their “stolen myths.” Really? I doubt it. You guys target small, defenseless, Christian businesses that you then destroy,

          • Griffonn

            The Left has persuaded them all to stay stuck in the “denial” stage of grief.

            They promise a gay-friendly Utopia, to be delivered as soon as the eeeevil Christians are no longer obstructing the Paradise.

            Never mind that the Left has a history of promising Paradise and delivering Section 8 housing and govt cheese. This time they mean it. No really.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            That is drivel.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            You really don’t know what a logical fallacy argument is do you?

          • calhou

            Sure I do. Except when dealing with progressive liberals most are not fallacies. In particular, the lefts fondness for incrementalism…….makes the slippery slope “fallacy” a fact.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            Then why do you continue to engage in them?

          • calhou

            Once again, when dealing with progressive liberals (and their ulterior motives) they are generally not fallacies.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            Yes, you engaged in a fallacy. You don’t get to decide if they are or aren’t.

          • MamaBear

            Actually I have a degree from a major university and extensive grad credit.

            I was thinking the same thing about you, however. In fact, your comments lead me to believe that you are quite an intolerant bigot and know virtually nothing about the Bible.

            עִזְב֣וּ פְתָאיִ֣ם וִֽחְי֑וּ וְ֝אִשְׁר֗וּ בְּדֶ֣רֶךְ בִּינָֽה׃

          • Kyler Phoenix

            No, you do not. I doubt you graduated from a public high school. Really? I have study every major holy text on earth and religion.mythology is my main course of study. Shall we compare our levels of education? Your school? Your degree?

          • MamaBear

            I will not give out personal information over the internet, but I have a BA from a major state university and 40+ hours of grad credit.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            No, you do not. It isn’t personal information that came hurt you. I didn’t ask for bank account numbers or SS numbers. many millions of people share their names and schools online. You aren’t fooling anyone.

          • MamaBear

            Well, I do not intend to share any identifying information with a phony who claims to have studied “every holy text on earth,” and calls Christians bigots and tosses out insults like candy at Halloween.

            I’ve watched a couple of people dealing with doxing and attempted doxing. No thank you!

            Ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω ὑμᾶς ὡς πρόβατα ἐν μέσῳ λύκων· γίνεσθε οὖν φρόνιμοι ὡς οἱ ὄφεις καὶ ἀκέραιοι ὡς αἱ περιστεραί.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            You won’t share because you are an insecure, uneducated, uninformed liar. Oh, and I don’t claim to, I have. I do believe I said every MAJOR holy text on Earth. And quite a few minor texts as well.

          • MamaBear

            Actually, you didn’t say major, but your abusive comment has been deleted so neither of us has proof.

            I can only assume by your comment above that you are used to getting your way by intimidation. I will be flagging your comment.

            BTW – A very wise person once told me that people who are quick to accuse others of lying are generally liars themselves and to beware of them.

            An even wiser Man said, Ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω ὑμᾶς ὡς πρόβατα ἐν μέσῳ λύκων· γίνεσθε οὖν φρόνιμοι ὡς οἱ ὄφεις καὶ ἀκέραιοι ὡς αἱ περιστεραί. Since you are so smart and can read “every Major holy text on Earth,” read it!

          • Kyler Phoenix

            It wasn’t abusive. Flag away. You are desperate and uneducated.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            Thin skinned huh? As well as an uneducated liar. How is that working out for you in life MAMA?

          • MamaBear

            Wow! You must have some really devious need to get my personal info. Flagged!

          • Kyler Phoenix

            No. I ask only to back up YOUR claims. Personal info? Your school and degree? YOU made the claim. Millions upon millions of people share that info publicly. You won’t because you are lying.

          • Griffonn

            Actually our God sacrificed himself, and calls on us to do the same.

            A huge ethical jump from all previous religions, which sacrificed an innocent victim.

            By the way, thank Christianity for the ethical system that “gay rights” relies on. Gays would have no argument – in fact, no reason why they shouldn’t be thrown off a roof, or cast into a fire – if it weren’t for Christianity.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            No, not a huge jump. You don’t know anything about the history of religion huh? Really? Do share the Christian “ethics” that gay rights rely on.

          • Griffonn

            It doesn’t sound stupid at all.

            Now please tell me why gays and lesbians need to keep trolling Christian businesses. I thought you guys supposedly believed in diversity and coexistence? When are you going to start coexisting with others the way you want others to coexist with you?

          • Kyler Phoenix

            They don’t. Period. That is asinine.

          • Griffonn

            If that is your best defense, your side is in trouble.

          • Kyler Phoenix

            I am not making a defense. Does it look like my side is in trouble? Show me any evidence.

          • Griffonn

            That you cannot extend your own stated principles to Christians proves that you’re in trouble.

            That you have to go from Christian business to Christian business, trying to punish them for not buying into the host of lies that lay at the heart of “gay marriage”, proves that you haven’t won anything at all yet, and that when more “children raised by gays and lesbians” come out and speak out about the abuses and dysfunctions necessary to sustain the illusion of equality, you won’t have any defense.

            You campaigned on equality, diversity, coexistence…and now people are noticing that you don’t practice what you preach: your coexist (like virtually everything else about the “gay rights” agenda) turns out to be nothing but lies.

          • acontraryview

            “That you have to go from Christian business to Christian business, trying to punish them for not buying into the host of lies that lay at the heart of “gay marriage”

            They are not being punished for “not buying into the host of lies that lay at the heart of gay marriage”. They are being held accountable to the law.

            What “host of lies” are you referring to?

          • Griffonn

            The law? The law says equality is for INDIVIDUALS. Not for couples, events, rites, ceremonies, or fake weddings.

            You can’t have equality as a couple because the law cannot grant equality where it doesn’t exist. A gay couple is like a married couple the way a really ugly drag queen is equal to a beautiful woman. A law that is designed to make people lie is not a legitimate law. You are entitled to equality AS A CITIZEN – which does not include forcing people to pretend your weird parody of a marriage is like a real marriage.

          • acontraryview

            “The law says equality is for INDIVIDUALS. Not for couples, events, rites, ceremonies, or fake weddings.”

            So then you are saying that it would be legal for a baker to turn down a request for an interracial couple or a couple who are of different faiths, correct?

          • Griffonn

            A Catholic baker should have the right to turn down a cake celebrating an abortion, even if the person demanding the cake insists it’s somehow discriminatory to view live births as somehow superior to deliberately killed babies.

            A gay wedding is a parody of the sacrament of marriage the way an abortion is a parody of a birth. It’s like saying that because Satanists have the right to religious freedom, it’s somehow discriminatory for a priest to refuse to share the Host for their black masses – in reality, a perversion of a thing is not the equal of a thing, and never will be, no matter how many laws you pass designed to inflict hurt on those who refuse to embrace your beliefs on command.

            You are what the First Amendment was designed to protect against.

          • acontraryview

            “A Catholic baker should have the right to turn down a cake celebrating an abortion”

            The baker does.

            “It’s like saying that because Satanists have the right to religious freedom, it’s somehow discriminatory for a priest to refuse to share the Host for their black masses”

            No, it is nothing like that. A priest is not a business owner.

            “You are what the First Amendment was designed to protect against.”

            How so?

          • jjhot254 .

            a person’s race is inherent to that individual, we are born as a certain race. sexual practice is a CHOICE!! whether we choose to have sex with a male or female, or at all, is a CHOICE!!
            your argument is not an argument at all

          • acontraryview

            “I thought you guys supposedly believed in diversity and coexistence?”

            I’m pretty sure that black people believe in diversity and coexistence. Does that mean that they should be OK with a business that refuses to serve black people?

            I find it interesting that when challenges were made to laws that banned same-gender marriage, the Christian Right put forth the argument that since the laws were put into place by the “will of the people”, the judiciary had no business ruling on those laws and overturning the “will of the people”.

            Yet, when people vote on anti-discrimination laws and put them into place by the “will of the people”, these same members of the Christian Right are the first to cry “unconstitutional!” and run to the courts asking them to rule on these laws and overturn the “will of the people”. Quite hypocritical, wouldn’t you agree?

          • Griffonn

            Nobody is refusing to serve gays.

            People are refusing to let gays demand they make obscene artifacts. So a better analogy would be, is it discrimination against gentiles if a gentile goes into a Kosher deli and demands ham and cheese OR ELSE.

          • acontraryview

            “People are refusing to let gays demand they make obscene artifacts.”

            What “obscene artifacts” are you referring to?

            “So a better analogy would be, is it discrimination against gentiles if a gentile goes into a Kosher deli and demands ham and cheese OR ELSE.”

            That would be a terrible analogy. The Kosher deli would not carry ham. A business cannot be forced to carry any particular product. A business is free to choose which products it will offer and which it will not. Once it has chosen to offer a certain product, it must do so in accordance with the law.

          • Griffonn

            A ‘gay wedding’ cake is an obscene artifact.

            Of course, it is not to you. But it is to a Christian, just as pork is obscene to a Muslim.

            If your “tolerance” BS weren’t 100% BS you would know this. You would be horrified at the idea of anyone behaving so hatefully toward a Christian. But of course the “tolerance” is a lie, isn’t it?

          • acontraryview

            “A ‘gay wedding’ cake is an obscene artifact.”

            How would a “gay wedding cake” differ from a “straight wedding cake”?

            “You would be horrified at the idea of anyone behaving so hatefully toward a Christian.”

            How is expecting a business to operate according to the law “hateful”? If a business owner felt that people of different religions should not mix, would it hateful to bring action against the owner for violating anti-discrimination laws regarding religious belief?

            “But of course the “tolerance” is a lie, isn’t it?”

            Tolerance does not include violating the law.

    • WorldGoneCrazy

      Brilliant post – as usual, The Last Trump. Thanks and God Bless!

  • Harry Oh!

    Attempting to stomp out Christianity under the guise of ‘tolerance for a persecuted minority’ will never work, just like it didn’t work for the Romans 2000 years ago, who used lions and tigers. You can’t fight God and in the end these poor lost souls will sadly pay the ultimate price.

    • Kandy

      The price will last through Eternity 🙁

    • acontraryview

      “Attempting to stomp out Christianity”

      How does requiring that businesses not discriminate based upon sexual orientation result in stomping out Christianity?

  • Guest

    The reasoning of the court decision is problematic as it could allow any one to deny anything with the excuse of conscience, how it proceeds will be interesting but whatever the decision ultimately is it will likely be a local Kentucky one since many states have state-wide civil rights ordinances and state constitutions that say liberty of religious conscience is not an excuse to act without regard for the rights of others.

    As to the mentioning the GLSO of Lexington is a non-profit and they are allowed to target the populations they serve, so they can refuse to serve people that don’t do so. The business in question is a for-profit business making public offers of accommodation, and according to civil rights laws can not do the same because of the customer’s membership in a protected class.

    Its a blip on the radar, but I am glad they are appealing.

    • Jean Adams

      How come the civil rights of Christians always are overruled in favour of those that deliberately target them. Why can’t they say this is a Christian business let’s go elsewhere? Instead they want to make Christians go against God’s law or else.

      • Guest

        Well first and most obviously there is no God’s Law against printing T-Shirts, so that’s a losing argument right there. Paul told the Corinthians its was ok to have dealings with ‘those of this world’ in a city where the major business was the largest temple to Aphrodite in the Roman Empire. Much of what Christians would sell to tourists ended up on pagan altars or in support of pagan worshippers. As Paul told them – the sins of those outside the Church are between them and God and not their concern. They want to buy a cake, or t-shirt or anything else to use in a a way the selling thinks is irreligious, they’ll answer to God about it, the seller won’t.

        Second, any American that doesn’t respect the right of every other citizen to NOT share their religious beliefs is problematic. We aren’t a theocracy, we have hundreds of different sects of just Christianity, let alone all the other beliefs that Americans have. To allow a business to religiously discriminate against fellow citizens is concerning and will someday come back to bite all of us on the backside if allowed. if someone can refuse to service a customer because of their beliefs why can’t they refuse to hire someone for same? Or pay people of one faith one wage and other employees a lesser one? There has never been a right to religious discrimination in the US and creating one is something that should concern all of us.

        The GLSO has already ‘gone elsewhere’ this is about letting a ruling stand that allows religious discrimination ignoring the customer’s right to religious freedom – that is what I don’t want to ever see on the books in the USA.

        • MamaBear

          I do not believe Paul was endorsing selling idols to their fellow Corinthians (or tourists). By business, he meant they could buy and sell neutral items like cooking pots, food, cloth.
          Printing gay slogans is not neutral.

          • Guest

            Bread and meat used on a pagan altar is just as much an idol as a calf made of gold if the seller knows that is their likely destination as any seller in Corinth would have known. The person putting it there sin’s are between them and God regardless.

    • acontraryview

      “The reasoning of the court decision is problematic as it could allow any one to deny anything with the excuse of conscience.”

      I disagree. Printing is a very specific activity. It involves producing words on items. If a white person came into their shop and wanted signs that say: “Black lives don’t matter”, I think it would be within the rights of the owner to refuse the order without being in violation of anti-discrimination laws based on race.

      “The business in question is a for-profit business making public offers of accommodation, and according to civil rights laws can not do the same because of the customer’s membership in a protected class.”

      They aren’t. They are turning down the content of the message. With that said, if they had printed t-shirts that said “White lives matter” for a white customer, but then refused to print a t-shirt that said “black lives matter” for a black customer, then that would be problematic.

      • Guest

        And a deli could refuse to make food they considered ‘black’ because of the message, or allow blacks to intermix with whites because of the ‘message’ that sends that they are equal, etc.

        Again, I think the reasoning of the court was weak and opens a door too wide. Other courts in other states say that there has to be a reasonable chance that the reader will think the mere publisher supported the message, and have found otherwise.

        Again, I am glad they are challenging it – establishing a right to religious discrimination for any reason is something I think would lead to very bad things.

        • MamaBear

          A Jewish deli should have the right to refuse to make non-kosher foods, no matter how much you want that BLT or beef with cheese sandwich. I think that would be a situation closer to refusing to print gay messages than you black and white examples.

          • Guest

            No one has asked these businesses for anything they didn’t offer for sale unlike your deli example – a customer who doesn’t care about the kosher status of the deli’s product doesn’t care if they make it kosher or not. And there was no ‘gay message’ if you have seen the t-shirt involved.

        • acontraryview

          “And a deli could refuse to make food they considered ‘black’ because of the message, or allow blacks to intermix with whites because of the ‘message’ that sends that they are equal, etc.”

          A deli offers certain foods. They are free to offer, or not offer, whatever foods they care to. What foods they choose to offer must not be denied to a customer based upon a trait that is covered under anti-discrimination law.

          The issue at hand is a business printing certain things. To the best of my knowledge, a deli does not print anything on sandwiches. Your analogy fails.

          “establishing a right to religious discrimination”

          This is not establishing a right to religious discrimination. Religious discrimination is when a business refuses to serve a customer based upon the customer’s religious beliefs.

          If what you are referring to is allowing businesses to refuse service to customers in violation of anti-discrimination legislation based upon the business owner’s personal religious beliefs, then I agree that could lead to very bad things.

          • Guest

            A used a deli since they often prepare food per the customer’s requests from the ingredients they have, just as a printer does designs submitted by the customer with the processes they have. Refusing to make something with the excuse ‘it goes against my beliefs’ pretty much allows the excluding of anything no matter what the protected class; creed, race, sexual orientation – whatever.

            And since the business is refusing the work because the beliefs of the customer are not the same as ones the owners hold that’s religious discrimination. Some people think God blesses marriages regardless of the sexes involved, a business refusing to do business because they don’t believe the same is religious discrimination, right?

          • acontraryview

            And since the business is refusing the work because the beliefs of the customer are not the same as ones the owners hold that’s religious discrimination.

            No, they are refusing the business because they find the message offensive. It has nothing to do with the religious beliefs of the person placing the order.

            “Some people think God blesses marriages regardless of the sexes involved, a business refusing to do business because they don’t believe the same is religious discrimination, right?”

            No, that is not an example of religious discrimination. Religious discrimination is when a business refuses to do business with people because they are a member of a certain faith. For instance, an owner of a Jewish deli refusing to serve a Christian.

          • Guest

            An ‘offensive message’ loophole woukd allow a racist to refuse to sell to someone for the same reason because if their race – they think the message that races are deserving of equal treatment is offensive.

            And a religion is a set of beliefs, not a label. They are refusing the customer because their beliefs are different than the business owners – there can’t even be a law that would facilitate that according to the SCOTUS. If they would sell an t-shirt to an one group announcing their festival with no details other than the name and date can’t deny the same to another merely because they don’t like the group’s beliefs or the legal actions those beliefs allow them to do that the beliefs of the business owners don’t allow them to do.

            How did Scalia put it, a rule against yarmulkes is a rule against Jews?

  • Emmanuel

    I’ll make the shirts; $100 a piece and each shirt would be printed wrong “accidentally.” Since they have no ethics, me neither. Oops!!!!

    • Dave_L

      “Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.” (Mark 10:19)

      • Emmanuel

        I’m not cheating anyone. I’m providing a product that got messed up in the process, an accident.

        • Dave_L

          Even though this is just pretend, would it be intentional deception likely to be found out? Doing bad for a good reason? Situation ethics?

          • Emmanuel

            I’m like Planned Parenthood, ethical in public and unethical when they need to get paid.

          • Dave_L

            Yes, but they are not followers of Christ.

        • Griffonn

          We need to be better than they are, because truth wins out over lies.

          We don’t need to cheat, lie, or sabotage just because they do. We need to keep our moral compass, and remember: time wounds all heels.

          • LeftCoast

            I know, just teasing a bit.

        • acontraryview

          If the product does not come out as promised, payment would not be required. The business would take the loss. Hopefully, with that attitude, you do not own a business.

          • LeftCoast

            Money up front. I will not lose a thing.

          • SashaC

            You can’t be foolish enough to think it works like that. You’d have to remake the product according to what they paid for. If you refuse, they could sue you and would definitely win.

            I own a small business and my competitor is finding this out the hard way. She was paid upfront for a job, job was not as requested, she refused to correct her mistake and legal action was threatened. Guess what? She’s redoing the job at her expense, which is a loss of thousands of dollars.

    • bowie1

      But would you get paid?

      • Emmanuel

        up front and no refunds or returns. LOL

  • Rebecca

    I think gays think if they force a person or business to do something that it will help spread acceptance of their choice. It doesn’t. Hearts are not changed by force. Right cannot be forced to accept wrong.
    Yes, we are to love the gay person, but that doesn’t mean we have to accept their sexual choice. Those who go along with the gay agenda are some of the most intolerant, unloving people there are.

    • Griffonn

      Would the gays like it if gay magazines were forced to run ads for Westboro Baptist Church or therapists that promote “curing” homosexuality?

      Would the New York Times like it if they had to treat pro-life ads as equal to pro-choice ads?

      Would gay lawyers like it if they lost the right to turn away clients they find morally objectionable?

      They should be careful what they demand. They seem to miss the point that equality by definition doesn’t just apply to them, but to everyone.

      • acontraryview

        “Would the gays like it if gay magazines were forced to run ads for Westboro Baptist Church or therapists that promote “curing” homosexuality?”

        Your analogy is flawed. A magazine/newspaper is free to determine the standards for accepting advertising. They are not free, however, to decide who they will allow to purchase their magazine based upon covered categories.

        “Would gay lawyers like it if they lost the right to turn away clients they find morally objectionable?”

        Again, your analogy is flawed. You would benefit from a better understanding of anti-discrimination laws and when they are applicable.

        “They seem to miss the point that equality by definition doesn’t just apply to them, but to everyone.”

        How so?

        • Griffonn

          Don’t be silly. The church guy who wanted the gay bakers to do the Leviticus cake were told in no uncertain terms that a cake is NOT a public accommodation, and asking someone to make an artifact that violates their beliefs is hateful.

          So try practicing what you preach, because if you can’t learn to coexist with others the way you expect them to coexist with you, people are going to figure out that your fake “no reciprocity” tolerance is a lie – and then it’s only a matter of time until they see why you need to lie, why you need to be so aggressive and hateful toward the people who don’t buy your false equivalences.

          • acontraryview

            “The church guy who wanted the gay bakers to do the Leviticus cake were told in no uncertain terms that a cake is NOT a public accommodation”

            No, the wording on the cake was not required. A cake, however, is required to be sold.

            Perhaps you failed to notice that I support the printer’s position. Putting words on something is different than simply selling a product. I would support a baker who did not want to put the phrase “gay marriage is good” on a cake. I would support a baker who did not want to carry wedding cake toppers depicting two men or two women. With that said, if a customer wants a cake that is identical to one that is offered to others, to deny that customer would, in some locations, violate anti-discrimination laws.

            “and then it’s only a matter of time until they see why you need to lie, why you need to be so aggressive and hateful toward the people who don’t buy your false equivalences.”

            What lies and what “need” are you talking about?

          • Griffonn

            Go ahead: justify why Christians aren’t entitled to the same right to live their identity that you are.

            Because “gay rights” was never about equality or tolerance or diversity; you don’t believe any of those things. It’s about punishing normal people for thinking diseased sexual habits are bad.

          • acontraryview

            “Go ahead: justify why Christians aren’t entitled to the same right to live their identity that you are.”

            They are.

            “Because “gay rights” was never about equality or tolerance or diversity; you don’t believe any of those things.”

            Yes, I do.

            “It’s about punishing normal people for thinking diseased sexual habits are bad.”

            People are free to think whatever they want. No one can be punished for their views on things.

    • acontraryview

      “I think gays think if they force a person or business to do something that it will help spread acceptance of their choice.”

      First, sexuality is not a choice. Second, do you believe that it is wrong to “force” a business to serve black people, or Jews, or women? Would you prefer that the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as all subsequent civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation be repealed?

      • Wheeler

        Wrong it is ABSOLUTELY Choice YOU CHOOSE what you put your sexual organs into 100% of the time or its RAPE. All Sexuality is Choice and is influenced from societal norms and Moral or in your case AMORAL upbringing. That you were allowed to fill your mind with such filth as a child to produce that which you chose to become and WORSE that society has allowed you that choice and is doing so more and more with your indoctrination tactics for homosexual preference as safe sex alternatives even in grade school is disgusting.

        • acontraryview

          “YOU CHOOSE what you put your sexual organs into ”

          There is no question that sexual activity is a choice. Sexuality itself, is not. If what you say were true, then you could simply choose, at any time, to be romantically and sexually attracted to men. Could you do that? Tell me, what possible reason would people have for choosing to be attracted to people of the same gender? The challenges faced by such a choice are numerous. So what would be their incentive for deciding to be gay?

          “Blacks and other races have no such option its a part of their DNA. Homosexuality has No basis in DNA or any form of genetics.”

          To make such a statement as fact would require that you aware of the workings of every portion of the human DNA. If you are, then you should share that information with the various scientists who are working to determine the function of every gene in the human DNA. No doubt they would be most appreciative.

          “or any form of genetics. indeed identical twins have been found to one be gay one not, why?”

          You may wish to familiarize yourself with research on epigenetic factors. You will find that research is showing that epigenetic factors play a role in determine sexuality.

          “because its THEIR CHOICE what they sleep with and make commitments to.”

          All actions, outside of autonomic actions, are a choice. The issue is not the action people take, but their innate sexuality. Again, if sexuality were a choice, then you could simply choose today to be sexually and romantically attracted to men. Is that a choice you could simply make?

          “That your twisted mental disorder is now popularized by television and media is the reason this country and others like it have seen such a moral decline in appropriate family values and seen drastic increases in drug abuse, sexual abuse, kidnapping, sex slavery, prostitution, and death throughout.”

          Basis?

  • Dave_L

    Jesus tells Christians to forfeit their legal rights. “And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.” (Matthew 5:40)

    Under Jewish Law, you could not keep a poor person’s garments past the end of the day. So here Jesus not only tells us to give more than what they demand of us but to also forego litigation.

    He tells us”…..Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God’s sake, Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.” (Luke 18:29–30)

  • Jean Adams

    What about the human rights of Christians?

    • Wheeler

      Remember Queers basically believe that which they want to be not what IS, and claim Christians are all delusional naive bigots who have no understanding of their superior nature of free sexual expression and doing what feels good instead of what Christians believe to be morally right. You know, Marriage between a man and women in order to procreate and actually raise their children as moral beings in faith and under the blessing of God. Homosexuality is as amoral as rape, incest, bestiality, adultery, bigotry, infidelity, prostitution, and murder. Its a dishonorable act of sodomy the worst degradation and humiliation any individual can commit against another human being that we as Christians condemn. The Act they openly believe is completely justified to act upon and not have to be repentant for. The primal animistic lustful acts of beasts not humans.

    • acontraryview

      What human rights are you referring to?

  • afchief

    Attacks on Christians like this was NEVER a major issue before 0bama came into power. Ever since this lawless evil man came into office lawlessness and immorality has increased greatly. Every evil under the sun now feels empowered because of this lawless man. This is not only the worst president this country has ever had, he is the worst American who has ever set foot in America. EVER! Only a man full of satan can believe in killing babies born alive. You Christians who voted for this man have blood on your hands. Gay marriage is YOUR fault! The rise of ISIS and the murder of Christian by their hands is YOUR fault!!! The fall of this country is your fault. In fact, I won’t even call people who voted for this evil monster Christian.

    It is because of your lack of wisdom, discernment and covetousness evil is flourishing in this country.

    • Dave_L

      “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Ephesians 6:12)

      • afchief

        It was man’s freewill that put this man in office.

        • Dave_L

          “Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: For wisdom and might are his: And he changeth the times and the seasons: He removeth kings, and setteth up kings: He giveth wisdom unto the wise, And knowledge to them that know understanding:” (Daniel 2:20–21)
          “The lot is cast into the lap; But the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.” (Proverbs 16:33)

          “For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” (Philippians 2:13)

          • afchief

            Dave, you are using the “head knowledge” thing again, and not the Holy Spirit heart thing. We are a republic and republics make an end of Kings/rulers. Such an end was only made possible by Christ.

            The moment Christ died a new covenant was born. The curtain in Herod’s Temple which separated the holy of holies from the people was torn asunder. From that moment forward no one stood between each person and their God. No Priest. No King.

            We have a one on one with God. That means we are born with rights from God. Then there is no such thing as a noble a king or a ruler. I am EQUAL to any man and every man before God and the law.

            All men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…..is indeed a Christian principle.

          • Dave_L

            Please confirm your “heart knowledge” with Scripture.

            “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16–17)

          • afchief

            Study to show yourself approved. Anyone can quote scripture.

          • Dave_L

            If what you say is true, please quote Scripture to verify what you say is true.

          • JGC

            What evidence demonstrates that a supernatural entity referred to as the holy spirit actually exists?

          • afchief

            Do you exist?

          • JGC

            Non-responsive: please answer the question asked, afchief. What evidence demonstrates that a supernatural entity referred to as the holy spirit actually exists?

          • afchief

            It is ALL about faith.

            Hebrews 11:6 (NASB) And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

            By faith you have to believe that He is.

          • JGC

            “By faith you have to believe that He is.”
            In other words, there is no evidence that such a supernatural entity exists and your belief that one does is indistinguishable from any other wholly-unsupported superstitious ideation.

          • afchief

            that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,

            Romans 1:19-22

    • Names_Stan

      Attacks on Christians like this was NEVER a major issue before 0bama came into power.

      Right…because I have it on good authority that:
      1) Madalyn Murray O’Hair was Obama’s secret child!

      Even though O’Hair was like 50 when the President was born.

      2) If you do a Google search on “church and state historical perspective”, all that comes up is a giant picture of Obama.

      Except not really. There are reams and reams of historical and academic debate through the decades.

      3) And before Obama, no Supreme Court decisions have had any impact on today’s debates around this issue…

      Except that it totally did and the Everson standard from like 1947 has left a huge trail of subsequent decisions in its wake.

      Your use of the all-caps ‘never’ was rather misguided in this case.

      • afchief

        Poor liberal, there has NEVER been a release of evil like there is today. We Christians can see it. You liberals are BLIND to spiritual things!!!

        • Names_Stan

          Poor liberal, there has NEVER been a release of evil like there is today. We Christians can see it. You liberals are BLIND to spiritual things!!!

          Well in today’s technological world, even our blind neighbors can do a Google search.

          You probably should have as well. Because I think that claim would be rather hard to document…but if anybody can, Google can.

          Being the top notch fella I am, I’ll make the counter case first, even though you never provided an ounce of rationale or evidence inside your statement. (Unless you count all-caps. Oddly, I don’t tend to count those.)

          1) The 1910’s: Just because WWI is calmly passed over in U.S. schools, it actually was a real historical event. 70 Million fought. 39 Million were killed or injured.
          At the Somme, casualties were about 1.2 Million. One single battle.
          Find an event approaching that in the 21st century.

          2) The 1930’s: Hunger, death, disease, the rise of the fascism, the beginning of the pograms.

          3) The 1940’s: Is this one really necessary? Millions and millions.

          4) The 1960’s: Children practiced taking cover under desks for what was considered impending nuclear war. We can’t appreciate what it felt like in ’63 to be convinced everything could be wiped out in a single apocalyptic event. Today our only comparison is school shootings, which have affected far less people than any of the events I’m listing.
          Elsewhere, if you were black you experienced the evil of well documented terror, threats, beatings and murders. This and worse had been their reality for hundreds of years prior as well.
          Behind the Iron Curtain, millions died or suffered forced labor.

          That’s four decades that have absolutely no comparison in the modern day.

          And I didn’t even cover pre-20th century widespread atrocities, death, disease, instability and unrest.
          Today millions of the people will interact with the internet, none of the wondering where their next meal will come from, never thinking whether their currency will spend tomorrow, or whether some mob or another will drag them off.
          All those things happen globally, but on a scale so small compared to historical norms it’s not even close.

          I understand that hysteria and hyperbole are hobbies of yours. It may even be a neurosis or phobia you fight. But give people a bit of credit who lived before us, during times of horrendous evil, both natural and man-made, and realize the vast majority of today’s egocentric Americans don’t even know what real evil is.

          • afchief

            Silly liberal, you do not have eyes to see. In fact you are quite blind!!!

            2 Corinthians 4:4 (NASB) in whose case the god (satan) of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving (you)

            1 Corinthians 2:14-16 (NASB) But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

            You cannot see the evil unleashed today. You are blind!!!!

          • Names_Stan

            You cannot see the evil unleashed today. You are blind!!!!

            That passage says “times of difficulty”. It never claims that to be the same thing as what you are saying…this Most Evilest Ever foolishness.

            Think how ridiculous it would sound to tell Christians to “avoid”:
            – Those who mass murder (Holocaust)
            – Those who rape and pillage (Multiple centuries)
            – Those who torture (Inquisition)
            – Those who all starve together (Widespread before the present day)
            – Those who put children into forced labor (early 20th century, and generally all centuries)
            – Those who will give you Bubonic Plague

            Your passage is ridiculous as “proof” that 2015 is “evilest”. By that logic, you would have to say a person who claimed that verse in 1942 was obviously wrong…when the fact is, you wouldn’t have survived a day in some countries then.

            The problem is this: you have it so good in this world, you’ve been able to convince yourself that sex is the only actual, real sin. Every post you make proves that.

            I truly wish for you, and for me, that we always have it that good. Because if we ever personally see and feel true evil, we will immediately realize just how fantastic healthy people inside the USA had it in 2015.

            I have to admit that sometimes I wonder if you’re a parody account. But surely nobody would waste their time spreading this stuff if they didn’t believe it, just to make Christianity look bad.

            If you aren’t a parody, there is little doubt that your false authority to condemn me to hell is sin. And your knowingly false pronouncement that other people enjoying a wedding somehow constitutes the worst evil ever, is also sin.

            In both cases it is purely a spirit of ungratefulness for the grace of God.

          • afchief

            Ahhh but poor liberal, a reprobate mind does not see the truth.

            Isaiah 5:20 (NASB) Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
            Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
            Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

          • Names_Stan

            While you’re picking through the Old Testament for verses that aren’t even about sex, I’ll refrain from posting one of the dozens of Jesus’ direct teachings on self-righteousness…otherwise known as the actual “Big One”.

            Sex didn’t make His top ten. Which is why you have to turn to generalized passages. Or turn to Paul, not realizing that his world had vast immorality, easily approaching our’s today.

            The blindness that’s hardest to cure is the man who believes he is worthy in God’s eyes, simply because he has found a few sins of others that don’t particularly tempt him.

          • afchief

            This is what a reprobate mind does…….it denies the truth. It is blinded by sin. It gratifies the flesh. It indulges in strange flesh. It lies when confronted with truth. It does not think rationally. It exists for today. It does not think about eternity. It is blinded by the god of this world (satan). It is a walking dead person waiting for death.

          • Cady555

            Yes. Small pox caused the death of hundreds of millions around the globe. It’s gone. Eradicated. Over.

            Polio killed or maimed thousands a year through the 1950s. Today it exists “in the wild” in only two countries, and is expected to be eradicated in 2 or 3 years.

            Babies no longer die from whooping cough. Children are no longer left blind or deaf by measles.

            We have much to be grateful for.

          • Names_Stan

            Exactly. Making the world more awful than it really is, just so they can threaten others with the end of the world, is truly prideful and ungrateful.

  • Reason2012

    Adults continue to permanently turn away from homosexuality, even after decades of believing the lie they were “born that way”, proving it’s not genetic, but the product of indoctrination, confusion, mental instability and/or abuse.

    Homosexual behavior is most literally pointed out as a sin, and God has not changed on that regard. But if a person has those inclinations but does not act upon them, does not dwell in lust upon others, but is instead struggling against them to avoid them, then it’s not a sin. It’s just like sinful inclinations of any kind: it’s acting upon it when it becomes a sin.

    And this is what God says about sin and specifically the behavior of homosexuality:

    Romans 1:26-27 ”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: (27) 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.”

    1 Corinthians 6:9-10 ”Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [men who willingly take on the part of a “woman” with another man], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [s odomites], (10) Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

    1 Timothy 1:9-10 ”Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, (10) For_whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind [s odomites], for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

    Jude 1:7 ”Even as_Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

    Luke 17:29 ”[Jesus said] But the same day that Lot went out of_Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.”

    Matthew 19:4-6 ”And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

    Jesus made it quite clear God made us male and female so that a man will leave his father and mother (not two fathers, not three mothers and so on) and cleave onto his wife (not his husband and so on).

    The Word of God rebukes us all – even if we all try to say we don’t believe the Bible, the very Word of God will be our judge when we face Him. And God is a righteous judge and will judge us all – not turn a blind eye to our sin. Do not be deceived by the world: it’s God we will have to convince that His word was a lie, not men. What happened in Noah’s day when the entire world rejected God? Did God spare them because there were so many? No – they all perished except for Noah and his family!

    Proverbs 9:10 ”The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.”

    God spared not His chosen people – we are kidding ourselves if we think He will spare the United States of America if we choose to blatantly turn away from Him.

    Jeremiah 12:17 ”But if they will not obey, I will utterly pluck up and destroy that nation, saith the LORD.”

    Luke 17:28-30 “So also as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; (29) but the day Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from the heaven and destroyed them all. (30) Even so it shall be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.”

    Romans 1:18-32 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold [suppress] the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

    For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 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.

    Therefore 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 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; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, m urder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.”

    The entire Bible points out men having_sex with men is an abomination. Likewise woman having_sex with women. It’s not just Paul that pointed it out.

    Genesis 19:4-13 “But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of S odom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them [men wanting to have_sex with men].

    And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing [he offers his daughters to be_raped to keep them from having_sex with another man – shows_rape is not the issue but male on male_sex]; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

    And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

    And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.”

    These two messengers were sent to destroy that place before the event where they tried to_rape these messengers.

    Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

    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.”

    Even cross-dressing is an abomination:

    Deuteronomy 22:5 “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.”

    Deuteronomy 23:17 “There shall be no_whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a s odomite of the sons of Israel.”

    1 Kings 22:46 “And the remnant of the s odomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land.”

    1 Kings 15:11-12 “And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father. And he took away the s odomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.”

    2 Kings 23:7 “And he brake down the houses of the s odomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove.”

    Ezekiel 16:49-50 “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister S odom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.”

    And the “pride” parades about homosexuality are more of the same.

    Matthew 19:4-5 “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?”

    Not father and father. Not mother and mother. Not his husband.

    And only two people of opposite gender can become “one flesh”.

    Live forever, people – not temporarily only to be cast out for living for the things of this world.

    May God/Jesus Christ be glorified!

    • Cosmic Mastermind

      Then God is wrong.

  • acontraryview

    I side with the printer in this case. I don’t believe they should be required to place a specific message on a product if it that message is one they do not want to print. Nor do I believe that this situation was what the anti-discrimination laws were designed for.

  • Cosmic Mastermind

    I am conflicted on this issue. Imagine if a store refused to serve “colored people”, there would be an outcry from Christians. You can NOT put a sign in your shop window that says “NO HOMOS” any more than you can display a sign saying “NO NEGROES”.

    But on the other hand, what if a store exclusively sells pro-vegetarian merchandise and they happen to sell custom labeled products – lets say T-shirts – and someone comes in and orders a batch of T-shirts that read “Put down the veggie-burger and get a REAL meal at Bob’s Steak Shack”? It’s different when it your moral beliefs being stepped on.

    • acontraryview

      “You can NOT put a sign in your shop window that says “NO HOMOS””

      Actually, in most places in the US you can. Sexuality is not a covered category is much of the country.

      “what if a store exclusively sells pro-vegetarian merchandise and they happen to sell custom labeled products – lets say T-shirts – and someone comes in and orders a batch of T-shirts that read “Put down the veggie-burger and get a REAL meal at Bob’s Steak Shack”?”

      Since being carnivorous is not a covered category, there would be no issue with turning down the order.

      • Cady555

        But setting aside discrimination laws and looking at it morally, the hypothetical store sells vegan themed products to any customer who wants to buy them. This is how it should be. They can turn down non vegan themed orders but not customers.

        If the customer wants pictures of vegetables to serve as placemats under 20 oz steaks, they should sell the pictures. What the customer does upon leaving the store is not the store’s concern.

        The printer can limit his product to items with religious themes, but any customer should be able to purchase what the store sells, even if the customer wants to use the products as targets at his gun range.

        The problem with the bakers is that they would sell a product to customer A but refuse to sell the exact same product to customer B.

        • acontraryview

          Agreed.

      • Cosmic Mastermind

        To your first point – WTF? Seriously? It’s patently illegal just about anywhere else in the western world.

        To your second point – Yes, I understand that, I just mean that for people who are not Fundamentalist Christians it is easy to dismiss the (admittedly homophobic and bigoted) beliefs of those who are, but if they found themselves in similar situation having their cherished beliefs trodden on in the name of equality or inclusivity, they’d be making the same kind of arguments that Blaine Adamson is making.

        Blaine Adamson is wrong but I worry that the pendulum is going to swing too far in favor of Draconian political correctness.

        • acontraryview

          “To your first point – WTF? Seriously?”

          In the US, there is no federal protection for gay people regarding public accommodation. 23 States offer protection for gay people regarding discrimination in public accommodation. The rest do not. In the states that do not, there are some cities/counties which prohibit such discrimination. Elsewhere, it is perfectly legal for a business owner to put in a sign in the window saying “NO HOMOS”.

          Federal law would prohibit a business in any state from refusing to serve “negroes”.

          “but if they found themselves in similar situation having their cherished beliefs trodden on in the name of equality or inclusivity, they’d be making the same kind of arguments that Blaine Adamson is making.”

          Possibly. However, even though religious belief is a protected category, I don’t think that a printer should be required to accept an order from the Westboro Baptist Church to print t-shirts with their favorite saying: “God Hates Fags”. Do you?

  • http://biblewordstudy.org Adam in Christ

    Fellow blood-bought believers in the body of Christ: These battles will not be won by contending with flesh and blood, but by exercising our Christ-given authority to bind up the forces of spiritual wickedness (Eph 6:12) behind this increased darkness coming against our land. God in the flesh, the Lord Jesus Christ, gave us the power and the authority to tread on serpents and scorpions (Luke 10:19) and over all the power of the enemy.

    One can put a flight to a thousand, and two ten thousand (Deut. 32:30). Let’s unite and come against this wickedness!

    In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, I come against all spiritual wickedness against “Christian Outfitters”. In Jesus’ name, I bind the strongman (Matt. 12:29; Mark 3:27; Luke 11:21) ruling spirit of sexual perversion coming against that business with a three-fold cord (Ecc. 4:12) and cut all the cords from the heavenlies to the ground below (Psalm 2:3). I dry up all your waters (Jer. 50:38). The Lord Jesus Christ made an open show of you — and He will have the victory!

    Amen.

    • LadyFreeBird<In God I Trust

      In Jesus Name, Amen.

  • Cady555

    I’m torn, but I think I agree with printers here. They are consistent about what products they will sell, and it is not different for different custimers.

    I disagree that a gay pride event is a negative thing, but still think their decision is okay.

    It is different if they will print a product for one customer but refuse to print an identical product for a different customer. Example. Two couples named Alex and Billy want to print t-shirts to give to guests at their wedding. They can’t accept one order but reject the other. The product is identical.