This is an obvious fallacious argument. If a right to discriminate against particular classes in the market place, based on religious belief were guaranteed by the first amendment, there would be no need for the various state legislatures to propose such repugnant legislation.
There is a need for legislation because religious liberty under the First Amendment is diminished more and more in our society, even to the point where the government tries to compel people to go against their religious beliefs under the threat of suit.
I didn't say he condoned the sin. Please reread my post. Christ did not turn his back on sinners. One can not possibly draw an inference from the New Testament that Christ would not deal publicly, commercially or personally with sinners.
When he said that the greatest commandment was to love thy neighbor as thy self, there was no qualification. There is no way around it that the proposed Arizona bill emphatically rejects this teaching. apparently, somewhere down the road the greatest commandment became "Persecute the gays!"
Nobody is "persecuting" gays. This legislation came about because of cases in other states where gays (instead of simply going to another business) sued business owners who didn't want to provide services for gay weddings.
Like many other posters here, you're of the spiritually immature type who pits love against obedience. Christ would have us love all people, including gays, for we're all sinners and beggars at the mercy seat. But there's a difference between loving gays having anything to do with an abomination such as gay marriage. Much like 123JoeSchmoe, you're about letting anything fly in the name of "love." And you misinterpret the scriptures in order to do so.
