Is anyone forcing or trying to force a christian church to perform a gay wedding or is this all hypothetical?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

If they are a business, then yes. Businesses have to abide by the rules that are set. When sexual orientation is a protected class then they will have to do so or they can stop doing business.

As I said though, it is solved by simply being anti-gay in the way you do your wedding. Make it clear that you will be spreading the word of God and it is up to the groom and groom to decide if that is the kind of ceremony they want. I don't remember what wedding I was at but the dude running the show made it clear that marriage "should be between a man and a woman". Step it up a notch and the problem goes away.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

somewhat...if you consider a place called the Hitchin' Post a "church".

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/hitchingpost.asp

So you are OK with the state stepping in and telling churches what they have to do?

_________________

So, when the catholic church hired a known homosexual to paint the chapel ceiling and countless other commissions, did they endorse his lifestyle?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

I am sure some attorney's are.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins

So this is all hypothetical. I'm sure that the gays aren't really wanting to have a priest forced into performing their marriage.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

I truly have no clue, but I stand behind my post. I am sure there are attorney's that can't wait to handle the case and how it would turn out.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins

An attorney would have to be representing a plaintiff that was trying to force a church to do the ceremony.

Unless they were gay themselves.

_________________

I have not stated nor will I my point of view, all I am saying is there are attorney's waiting on this exact case, and it is coming.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins

Incredibly naive to think otherwise.

_________________

I don't know. I never imagined it being an issue. Even if there is a lawsuit I don't see it being a significant issue. I can't see people wanting that.

And churches get treated differently than businesses

Seems crazy. Like forcing Jehovah's witnesses to have a Halloween party or Muslims to have a "How to draw the Prophet" workshop

It's going to be an issue. Sooner or later.

And yes, it does seem crazy.

_________________

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

If they are doing weddings as a business yes I am. We tell businesses what to do all the time. Again, this is about businesses. You want to make a profit doing weddings? Then you can't discriminate against minorities or people based on their sexual preference. If you want to volunteer to do it or only provide it to members of your private circle.

I don't believe churches have any obligation to marry anyone. I'm pretty sure the Catholic Church would have told me to "Go F Yourself" if I wanted to get married by them because of poor attendance. Now, if they are stupid and say "We aren't marrying you because you are gay" then maybe they deal with some litigation but they deserve whatever they get.

The bottom line is that businesses are held to a standard where there are certain types of customers they can't deny based on who they are. If a business or a person is making money selling their services of marriage, then they are held to the same standard. The simple solution is for them to simply do weddings for free and then they can do them for free for whoever they want.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Any lawsuit of this type would get thrown out in a hurry. Courts won't touch any case that requires them to examine religious doctrine of a church. Even wrongful termination lawsuits are regularly thrown out as soon as the church claims any violation of religious doctrine. There is simply no way the first amendment could be interpreted to require a church to participate in a wedding that contradicts its religious doctrine. And that is as it should be -- and I'm 100% in favor of marriage equality and civil rights protections. Churches are simply not subject to this sort of law.

_________________
Look over there! A dry ice factory. A good place to get some thinking done.
Did I forget to mention, forget to mention Memphis? Home of Elvis and the ancient Greeks.

Even if Rand wins the Republican nomination (and he won't) the Republicans will lose the election on this crap alone.
People. Don't. Care.

_________________

From the Democratic front runner HRC...

“Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will,” she explained. “And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed. As I have said and as I believe, the advancement of the full participation of women and girls in every aspect of their societies is the great unfinished business of the 21st century and not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

Don't kid yourself about what will eventually become a society trying to force down the throats of others there views. History will repeat itself over and over.

_________________

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/h ... 17538.html

Interesting article. It's obviously written with a pre-conceived effort to discredit Rand, but still some truth to it. Rand paying zero attention as to the cause leading up to the whole mess. Moron.

_________________

churches are a business though. the customers may donate the money for it, but how is it really any different than say the proactiv company? they convince people to put snake oil on their face while churches convince people to pay for sermons. i really dont see the difference.

_________________
the world will always the world. your entire existence is defined by your response.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/blow-up-the ... 1434582592

I will give Rand Paul credit for 2 things:
1) Moving to a flat Federal Income tax is absolutely the right answer. I also agree that this can't be done without addressing the existing write-offs and loop holes.

2) he's the only candidate who has stepped forward with a real solution to a legitimate problem

he won't win the primary and I have plenty about him to dislike and disagree, but he's right on here.

_________________

I felt similar when I saw this this morning. Someone electable has to pick up on this.

_________________
Elections have consequences.

Right. Because Ike paying the Feds $10,000 of his $50,000 salary and leaving him with 40 grand to live on is exactly the same thing as Joe CEO paying $4 million on his $20 million salary and bonus leaving him to get by on a meager $16 million dollars. He'll probably have to cancel that trip to Turks and Caicos!

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

"14.5% flat-rate tax applied equally to all personal income, including wages, salaries, dividends, capital gains, rents and interest"

I'm pretty sure he'll be paying more taxes on his other sources of income.

I don't agree with everything in his proposal and his 2014 budget for cutting spending has major issues, but in principal our current systems is wrong. The only way income tax can be fair is for it to be flat.

_________________

Why do you think it would be fair for those who are benefitting the most from the system to pay the same rate as those who are barely benefitting at all?

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.

I agree completely on #1. Go to a flat tax and shut down 90% of the IRS. The 1% would pay more in a flat tax system.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan

How much tax do you think Joe CEO is paying on his $20 million? Its a lot less than $4 million.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan

This.

Why should a family near the poverty level pay the same rate as a CEO.

Shitty concept and horrible fucking idea.

_________________

Oh, ok. let's just keep the existing system that is clearly fair to the poor in place.

_________________

Rand's plan has a $50,000 standard deduction for a family of four. It also keeps the earned income tax credit in place. Therefore, the poor will have a negative to 0% tax rate. In addition, his plan repeals the payroll tax, so the poor would get a major tax cut. H

My concern is that this will blow a huge hole in the deficit.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You