Should discrimination against gays be allowed?

[McCulloch]

Should landlords, employers, educators, government agencies and persons conducting business be allowed, by law, to discriminate against homosexual persons solely on the basis of the person's sexual orientation?

Should churches be allowed to discriminate against homosexual persons?

[Bugmaster]

As for "anti-Christians", well, I'm not sure about them.

Yeah, seriously... who are these mysterious anti-Christians ? I could think of maybe Muslims, but they have mosques already and aren't gay, so they don't count. Atheists don't have churches and generally just want to be left alone. Jews have synagogues and are generally pretty peaceful. Buddhists worship in private. Who's left ? The Wiccans ?

[The Persnickety Platypus]

I am pretty sure he is referring to the Democrats.

[Chimp]

The Anti-Christian church ( Church of Satan ) went bankrupt...their
old church between 23rd and 24th Aves on California St. in San Francisco
is now the Dirt Lot of Satan, or as I call it the DL-of-S.

[Cephus]

Let's say we have this religion founded on the belief that only women can join. Obviously, homosexual and heterosexual males are not allowed to join. Should they be forced by the law to be non-discriminatory towards males? As much as I despise discrimination, I think they should be allowed to follow their beliefs on who can join based on sexual orientation, same with race, hair color, amount of money in the bank, or how many dogs they own.

I've got no problem with that, churches are voluntary organizations and should be able to decide who can and who cannot join. Anyone who doesn't like it should just go join another church or start their own.

The problem, however, starts when these church groups start thinking they can decide for the general public who is good and who is bad. A church or a religion can make policy for itself but when they start demanding that everyone follow their beliefs, that's where the line needs to be drawn, and any church that comes out and tries to control public policy needs to lose their tax-exempt status.

[Cathar1950]

Cephus wrote:

and any church that comes out and tries to control public policy needs to lose their tax-exempt status.

I think this tax idea has merit.
I think that Anti-Christian means anyone who does not believe as the "bible believer" belives and interprets. That would include a lot of people. Mostly dems. I bet and liberals of course.

[AlAyeti]

I think this tax idea has merit.
I think that Anti-Christian means anyone who does not believe as the "bible believer" belives and interprets. That would include a lot of people. Mostly dems. I bet and liberals of course.

Cathar1950,

You cannot see nor can hear my standing ovation. But after reading the truth in your post . . . I had to applaud it for the most part.

But I believe you are mistaken about non bible-believers.

[Cephus]

Cephus wrote:

and any church that comes out and tries to control public policy needs to lose their tax-exempt status.

I think this tax idea has merit.
I think that Anti-Christian means anyone who does not believe as the "bible believer" belives and interprets. That would include a lot of people. Mostly dems. I bet and liberals of course.

I think the term is "non-Christian", not "Anti-Christian". I've got nothing against Christians, what I have a problem with is Christians trying to make me, through force of law, believe what they believe. Preaching politics from the pulpit is wrong. If you want to get into politics, pay your entry fee (ie. taxes)

The same is wrong when the PTA uses publications paid for by the taxpayer to spread a political message, as is being done in many school districts right now. Neither should be allowed.

[Cathar1950]

AlAyeti I was being sarcastic except the tax part.
Cephus you have a good point and I was speaking from a Bible believing Christian point of view. They seem to think anyone who does not believe the bible is infallible and inerrant are anti-christ.
My Christian idea is that any one that believes in the virgin birth or the Jesus was God are pagans but that does not mean they are not Christians. If they identify themselves as Christians they are Christians. The Ebonites believed that Jesus was a prophet-king and fully human and not divine and that his death was not a sacrifice for sin. I agree with them and belive them to be Christian in fact I thin they thought like the first followers of Jesus and not like Paul's followers.

[Cephus]

Cephus you have a good point and I was speaking from a Bible believing Christian point of view. They seem to think anyone who does not believe the bible is infallible and inerrant are anti-christ.

I'm sure the fanatics would think that but it's irrelevant. We have a secular public society and whatever some religious nutcase believes doesn't make a bit of difference to me. You cannot force your religious views on the rest of the population, just because you are convinced that your religious views are right. End of story.

[Cathar1950]

I'm sure the fanatics would think that but it's irrelevant. We have a secular public society and whatever some religious nutcase believes doesn't make a bit of difference to me. You cannot force your religious views on the rest of the population, just because you are convinced that your religious views are right. End of story.

You have no argument here.

I think that Anti-Christian means anyone who does not believe as the "bible believer" belives and interprets. That would include a lot of people. Mostly dems. I bet and liberals of course.

This statement was a sarcastic remark aimed at AlAyeti's ideas and rantings. No one else unless you believe it.