Posted by:
gods love
(
)
Date: August 04, 2016 08:57AM
Tall Man, Short Hair Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You see, you betray the actual motive of these
> actions and demonstrate that the movement to quell
> religious freedom is alive and well.
This country was born to quell the "religious freedom" of those who would demand that the public abide by their beliefs. "Make NO LAW..." I understand that the majority, the religous, would like to nullify that part of the constitution, but we would eventually land in a situation like much of Europe and all of the Middle East.
> Six photographers have shops on Main Street. A
> gay couple bypasses the one who advertises he
> specializes in gay weddings and heads toward the
> one with the scripture verse on the door.
And therein you betray yourself. Because you KNOW that no gay couple could love or be loved by your God. They could not possibly find a scripture verse to be the draw that leads them into the shop.
Your Jesus could not possibly love these sinners, and would tell the gathering crowd to cast the stones. (Remember the reason that he said he spoke in parables?)
In fact, it was their love of that verse on the shop wherein they found their salvation. So their hearts warm, they go in, only to be told by another human that SHE has a greater understanding of Jesus than the two women, who are "politely" told that their religious freedom has no meaning or worth at this public place of business, and they will not be served.
Both "sides" have looked at and accepted that verse, but one side has a god-like (majority) claim on the current "meaning of God." In very large swaths of the planet, religious freedoms are protected by sharia.
Since you don't believe that basic human needs, such as the right to not live in a war-torn nation, should not be denied anyone, am I to assume that you welcome the droves of "peaceful" Muslim refugees, along with the right to their religious freedom?
>
> This is why religious freedom laws will be fought
> for by people of faith.
That is exactly what is happening in much of the world, the war-torn situation the constitution seeks to avoid, and why there must remain a separation of church and state.
If you wish to claim that the founders grounded the constitution on a strong faith in God, I might even agree with you, but, argue that their faith took their beliefs seriously. They were no cherry-pickers. They may have been as afraid of casting stones as they were of denying Jesus himself.
Christians are the majority in the US right now, but not all of them are so arrogant and shortsighted to believe that they KNOW the thoughts and intent of THE ONE TRUE GOD, nor are they willing to impose their beliefs on others.
In fact, there are enough stones for the KY clerk on her fourth marriage, the bakers who cannot possibly be "without sin," (think through that verse) men who refuse to or must wear a beard, women who won't cover their shoulders, female children who are raped...
"Religious freedom" is in the eye of the beholder, and therefore, not of worldly law, and the reason for the parable of "render unto Caesar," that the founders respected. But since it is within your rights to ignore the parts of Christianity that you find unpalatable, you go right ahead. Just don't ask the rest of us to impose our wills on other human beings, God, Jesus or Caesar or our founders. References: Bible and Constitution.
You'll have no further response from me. You need to catch up on your reading. You need to understand who it is, exactly, that you are following.