You say I'm spiritually immature, but YOU are the one, who feels the point of the gospel account of Jesus warning, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone" is to chastise the suspected adultress not to sin again.
I don't ignore
either point. You, however, do selectively ignore the second point.
You're here pretending to care about what Jesus says. Yet, while He considers homosexual behavior a sin, you obviously don't. So why are you trying to quote someone you fundamentally disagree with on this very issue? Oh, that's right, you're a lawyer.
The first amendment is not an absolute right and never was designed to justify discrimination in public commerce.
One has to be a fool to believe that the legislation seeks to protect religious beliefs. It is aimed at trying to appease any bigot who has a personal problem with gays. It was refreshing, but expected, that so many businesses saw through this facade to condemn it.
And if there are photographers, florists, etc., who have such a problem dealing commercially with gays that they refuse service, they better pick another line of work. Those businesses need public mercantile licenses, and if you are to conduct business in public and seek pecuniary awards, you don't make up your own rules.
What a bunch of BS. The gays in these cases could have found any number of other photographers, florists, etc. who would have taken their business. But, no, they chose to make an issue out of it because they are determined to force
their way of life down everyone's throat via corrupt and Godless courts, judges, and lawyers who think nothing of chipping away at freedom of religion; which they hold in contempt to begin with.
You take the standard dishonest liberal standpoint that religious people who believe homosexual behavior is a sin are just bigots looking for a way to justify themselves rather than actual believers who take what the scriptures say seriously.
