[tomder55]

Some religious institutions and churches do indeed perform gay marriages but the tick is if the couples relocate to where gay marriage from another state is not recognized.

That will be challenged at the Federal level . Give it time. The argument used will be the 'full faith and credit 'clause.

[ebaines]

Some religious institutions and churches do indeed perform gay marriages but the tick is if the couples relocate to where gay marriage from another state is not recognized.

True enough. And it gets really screwed up if a married gay couple moves to another state that doesn't recognize gay marriage and then later want to get divorced. Gay married couples can't get divorced in Texas cause TX doesn't consider them legally married in the first place. So consider what happens if a gay couple gets married in, say, NY, then moves to TX, and they separate without being divorced (as it's impossible for a gay couple to be divorced in TX). Now suppose one or the other then falls in love with a person of the opposite sex and gets married in TX - no problem, according to TX. Now if this couple then moved back to NY they would be guilty of bigamy and could be arrested. So it seems that NY places a higher moral standard on protecting the sanctity of marriage than does TX - who'd have thought! To make it even more bizarre - suppose after moving back to NY one of the married couple dies without a will. Under state laws of both NY and TX if a married person dies intestate and if there are no children involved the spouse inherits the decedant's estate. So who inherits? NY says the original gay couple are still married and the hetero marriage is a sham; TX says the opposite. Yikes - this would make a fun case for the Supreme Court!

[Wondergirl]

Some religious institutions and churches do indeed perform gay marriages but the tick is if the couples relocate to where gay marriage from another state is not recognized.

Yup. My sil and her partner of over 30 years had to drive to Iowa from their home in Colorado last year to get married. Now, back in Colorado, their marriage and all the rights it confers doesn't exist. As they age into their 60s and 70s and end-of-life challenges overwhelm them, I wonder how this will play out legally.

[JudyKayTee]

"... same sex union is quite opposite the laws of nature."


This is offensive.

I'd like to know more about the "laws of nature" that say this.

So everyone attracted to someone of the same sex is some sort of biological freak?

Could you possibly be more close minded!

[tomder55]

Yikes - this would make a fun case for the Supreme Court!

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
Article 4 Sec 1 .

[paraclete]

Last time I looked the laws of nature said survival of the fitest, kill or be killed, like begats like

The deviance we see in society is the result of degeneration in the gene pool

[Alty]

I wonder, if the florist, in the link Cdad provided, had refused to sell flowers to a black couple, because she's a racist, would the reactions be different? Would those that think she was in her right to refuse to provide flowers, think differently?

Are your religious liberties being denied? NO! But you are denying others of their basic human rights, all based on a religious belief. It's utter nonsense.

[cdad]

I wonder, if the florist, in the link Cdad provided, had refused to sell flowers to a black couple, because she's a racist, would the reactions be different? Would those that think she was in her right to refuse to provide flowers, think differently?

Are your religious liberties being denied? NO! But you are denying others of their basic human rights, all based on a religious belief. It's utter nonsense.

The only time that florist failed to provide service was when it moved into a religious rhelm. She on other occasions had sold them flowers. I understand your point but your missing the gist of the situation. In America retailors can refuse service for many reasons. It is common for eating establishments to have signs like "No Shoes, No Shirt - No Service.

[Alty]

The only time that florist failed to provide service was when it moved into a religious rhelm. She on other occassions had sold them flowers. I understand your point but your missing the gist of the situation. In America retailors can refuse service for many reasons. It is common for eating establishments to have signs like "No Shoes, No Shirt - No Service.

True, but she served this customer for years, he was a regular customer. She didn't refuse service until she found out he was gay. That's discrimination, like it or not.

So she's Christian, so she believes in God. So what? She has a legal right to believe what she wants, to be what she chooses. Religion is a right, and now, so is gay marriage! If she has a legal right "freedom of religion", and we all have to respect that, then why doesn't she have to respect the legal right to marry someone of the same sex? It goes both ways.

Let's paint this picture. A gay couple owns a flower shop. They sell to a Christian woman for years. One day she comes in, says that she's getting married in a church, that she'd like them to provide the flowers. They grasp her hand and say "I'm sorry, but I don't believe in God, so I won't sell you the flowers". Can you imagine the $hit storm the religious groups would cause over that? Don't tell me they wouldn't have the same reaction. In fact, we all know it would be a heck of a lot worse than what's happening to her, because it's religion, and any religious group that's discriminated against, well, hell would be more pleasant than dealing with the fallout lest you discriminate against religion.

Better yet, let's make it an Atheist that owns the flower shop. Let's leave gay out of it. No matter what, if someone refused to sell to someone because of their religious beliefs, the fit would hit the shan, and you all know it.

[cdad]

True, but she served this customer for years, he was a regular customer. She didn't refuse service until she found out he was gay. That's discrimination, like it or not.

So she's Christian, so she believes in God. So what? She has a legal right to believe what she wants, to be what she chooses. Religion is a right, and now, so is gay marriage! If she has a legal right "freedom of religion", and we all have to respect that, then why doesn't she have to respect the legal right to marry someone of the same sex? It goes both ways.

Let's paint this picture. A gay couple owns a flower shop. They sell to a Christian woman for years. One day she comes in, says that she's getting married in a church, that she'd like them to provide the flowers. They grasp her hand and say "I'm sorry, but I don't believe in God, so I won't sell you the flowers". Can you imagine the $hit storm the religious groups would cause over that? Don't tell me they wouldn't have the same reaction. In fact, we all know it would be a heck of a lot worse than what's happening to her, because it's religion, and any religious group that's discriminated against, well, hell would be more pleasant than dealing with the fallout lest you discriminate against religion.

Then with some things we are going to have to agree to disagree. Chiristians aren't like that. Most likely they may complain but they would go find another flower shop to get flowers at.

Also when you want to force things on people it never comes out good. Following your line of thinking I should be offended and demand (file suit) against a muslim butcher for not carrying bacon or my favorite pork roast? How dare they not carry my favorite pork product over "thier" silly religion. The same could be said about a jewish deli. You don't force them into converting to your way. You either participate or not. It's a "choice".

I highly doubt that the florist had no clue the person was gay. But I also believe they had a right to refuse service for a gay wedding based on their stated grounds.

[Catsmine]

True, but she served this customer for years, he was a regular customer. She didn't refuse service until she found out he was gay. That's discrimination, like it or not.

So she's Christian, so she believes in God. So what? She has a legal right to believe what she wants, to be what she chooses. Religion is a right, and now, so is gay marriage! If she has a legal right "freedom of religion", and we all have to respect that, then why doesn't she have to respect the legal right to marry someone of the same sex? It goes both ways.

Let's paint this picture. A gay couple owns a flower shop. They sell to a Christian woman for years. One day she comes in, says that she's getting married in a church, that she'd like them to provide the flowers. They grasp her hand and say "I'm sorry, but I don't believe in God, so I won't sell you the flowers". Can you imagine the $hit storm the religious groups would cause over that? Don't tell me they wouldn't have the same reaction. In fact, we all know it would be a heck of a lot worse than what's happening to her, because it's religion, and any religious group that's discriminated against, well, hell would be more pleasant than dealing with the fallout lest you discriminate against religion.

Better yet, let's make it an Atheist that owns the flower shop. Let's leave gay out of it. No matter what, if someone refused to sell to someone because of their religious beliefs, the fit would hit the shan, and you all know it.

So Westboro Baptist is equivalent to Gay Pride? Your analogy is suspect here.

Does the florist have a right to refuse flowers to a particular event? Absolutely. Do the participants have a right to organize a boycott or go to the media? Again, absolutely. Do the participants have the right to force the florist to provide the flowers? Never.

Besides, if you were the participants, would you really want the product of someone you had forced to create? Poison Ivy and Belladonna are rather pretty if arranged while wearing chemical resistant gloves.

[tomder55]

I wonder, if the florist, in the link Cdad provided, had refused to sell flowers to a black couple, because she's a racist, would the reactions be different? Would those that think she was in her right to refuse to provide flowers, think differently?

Are your religious liberties being denied? NO! But you are denying others of their basic human rights, all based on a religious belief. It's utter nonsense.

The point is that she did not refuse to sell flowers ;she refused to partake in a ceremony that she had religious objections to. This is not the same as the civil rights movement... not even close.

[Alty]

Then with some things we are going to have to agree to disagree. Chiristians arent like that. Most likely they may complain but they would go find another flower shop to get flowers at.

Also when you want to force things on people it never comes out good. Following your line of thinking I should be offended and demand (file suit) against a muslim butcher for not carrying bacon or my favorite pork roast? How dare they not carry my favorite pork product over "thier" silly religion. The same could be said about a jewish deli. You dont force them into converting to your way. You either participate or not. Its a "choice".

I highly doubt that the florist had no clue the person was gay. But I also believe they had a right to refuse service for a gay wedding based on thier stated grounds.

Of course you can't demand or file suit against a store for not carrying a product you want. That's ridiculous. That's not the case here. The patron went in to buy flowers, the store owner sells flowers. He was a loyal customer. It had nothing to do with demanding that she carry a specific product that's against her religious beliefs.

You mentioned before that in the US store owners can decide who to serve, the whole "no shoes, no shirt, no service". We have that in Canada as well. There are signs on the doors letting patrons know what's allowed and what's not. Most stores don't allow pets, and have a sign stating that on the door, roller blades often aren't allowed, skateboards are usually forbidden, all posted on the door.

If the owner of the flower shop only wants to serve certain people perhaps she should put a sign on her door, a simple "Christians and heterosexuals only" sign. Of course that would be really bad for business, but she's already put her foot in her mouth, she may as well commit and put it on paper.

[Alty]

You know what guys, forget it.

I don't see why someone else's decision to marry has any effect on anyone else's religious beliefs or rights. We all have choices in this world. If you choose to discriminate against people because of your religious beliefs, and you're called out on it, then you pay the price.

Remember that religion is also a right. Be grateful no one has tried to take that right away from you.

Alty out.

[Catsmine]

Remember that religion is also a right. Be grateful no one has tried to take that right away from you.

Which is precisely what Washington State is trying to do with their anti-discrimination suit.

[smkanand]

I believe religious rights of people and institutions like church should be kept intact while allowing gay marriages in legal terms. That's it.

[speechlesstx]

I reserve the right to refuse service to anyone at any time.

[JudyKayTee]

“I believe religious rights of people and institutions like church should be kept intact while allowing gay marriages in legal terms. That's it.”

That is not what you said - you said, “"... same sex union is quite opposite the laws of nature."

Which is these two opposite statements do you believe? You appear to have shifted your position.

Otherwise, I do some work for HOME - discrimination takes many forms and shapes. I see unwed mothers discriminated against. If a woman has a child, is not married, can support that child, can afford the rent - why is she not a suitable tenant? Can all unwed mothers be "lumped" into one category?

Does the word "gay" take away a person's identity?

As far as refusing service to anyone at any time, that's fine if no one takes legal issue.

[talaniman]

I reserve the right to refuse service to anyone at any time.

Within the law, and we do have guidelines for the basis you cannot refuse service to anyone.

[JudyKayTee]

There is a Muslim Temple in my neighborhood. People have protested, every now and then continue to protest, based on "religious" reasons. I think they are protests are discriminatory in origin.

That Temple does not infringe on my religious freedeom. The members do not fringe on my religious freedom.

Would it be any different if "gay" were in place of "muslim"?

Could I refuse to sell flowers to a Muslim who was getting married because I don't believe in Muslim marriage - particularly "multiple" marriages? And, yes, I occasionally knock on a door and ask for Mrs. X and there are two - the first and the second, both religious, one civil. Does that infringe on my religious rights?