Christian business owners . . .

[giblets]

IMO, right-wing Christians are using religion as a cover-up for their fundamental hatred of LGBT people. It sounds much nicer to interpret certain passages in the Bible as supposedly being against consensual romantic love between two people of same gender, than to simply say, "I hate ***s."

And to your other comment - we have won? Equal marriage is legal in all fifty states now? Protection for LGBT people from employment and housing discrimination is law in all fifty states now? LGBT teenagers have stopped killing themselves for being relentlessly bullied in school?

And I take it Martin Luther King Jr. was just being vindictive and spiteful by rubbing the faces of status quo supporters in the dirt in his fight for justice and freedom for everyone?

I do agree though, that any services DIRECTLY pertaining to, or related to, a wedding, a Christian business has the right to decide whether they want to provide such service, since I think that would be wrong just as it would be wrong to force churches to marry same sex couples if they do not want to do so. And I do have to wonder why a same sex couple - if they know beforehand - would knowingly go to an anti-LGBT Christian business when they may have an alternative business they could to, and spend their money.

Elok, right now it's reasonable to fine Christians 150k for saying no to baking the cake. This would fall afoul of the 8th, as it's the state of Washington upholding this, which objects to unreasonable fines, as well as the 1st, guaranteeing freedom of speech and expression. Religious beliefs are not exempt from this no matter how much Mr. Fun et al would prefer that only their religious beliefs are upheld.

liar

[Ben Kenobi]

And this clear argument is ...?

Read Romans. It's all in there. Paul argues that everyone has knowledge of God in their hearts and that the Gospels speak to this knowledge.

[Ben Kenobi]

liar

Mr. Fun is arguing that his religious beliefs deserve federal protection and has supported attacks on those who disagree.

He is agreeing that the Christian florist should be fined 150k.

I have never seen Mr. Fun argue in favor of protecting those who oppose gay marriage, unless it's to agree with the thin edge of the wedge because that currently supports his argument.

Years ago Fun was saying that gay marriage had no negative consequences for Christians. Now that there are negative consequences, Mr. Fun is arguing that Christians should be forced to accommodate them.

That's why he's arguing a distinction between, 'direct' and 'indirect', and not fundamental freedoms.

When he thinks they can shut down the Churches that disagree, he'll be arguing that they should all accommodate or be closed.

Guarantee it.

[giblets]

Mr. Fun is arguing that his religious beliefs deserve federal protection and has supported attacks on those who disagree.

He is agreeing that the Christian florist should be fined 150k.

liar

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, then, I challenge Mr. Fun to condemn the 150k dollar fine levied against the Christian florist.

[giblets]

Well, then, I challenge Mr. Fun to condemn the 150k dollar fine levied against the Christian florist.

liar

[Ben Kenobi]

Easy enough for Fun to prove I'm a liar.

[rah]

Yes, "random authors". Thanks for once again making an anecdotal evidence into your entire basis for something and for continuing to foster anti-intellectualism. I'm sure that sort of attitude has had no effect on what we think of people who study things in detail...

How about Tolkien? Is he random. All the experts that mention the WW themes that to his grave he denied. And the author I mentioned earlier was Farmer. He was random also.

[rah]

Well, one of the things he might say is that authorial intent is not the end all be all of analyzing a work. This is true both in a very simple sense ("I hated that book!") and in a more philosophical sense (see Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote).

I'll agree that intent isn't the end all, but if they're getting that wrong it has to make you wonder just how expert they are.

It's like art. An individual either likes it or he doesn't. People telling what others must like because they do is just silly.
I have no problems with art experts and literature professors discussing Styles and Historical backdrops (including the authors history) but saying what is good, is just their opinion. Every observer gets to make their own judgment on it. Everyone is their own expert in that regard.

[Kidlicious]

That's not what the bible teaches. Jesus built a church, with the Apostles, who spread the Gospels.

Christians spread the Gospel, not just Apostles. What are the verses that you are referring to?

[Kidlicious]

Read Romans. It's all in there. Paul argues that everyone has knowledge of God in their hearts and that the Gospels speak to this knowledge.

Knowledge of God is not the same thing as believing the Gospel. You know that. Are you going to waste my time?

[N35t0r]

Are you going to waste my time?

Ooh, I know the answer to this one. Yes!

[Imran Siddiqui]

How about Tolkien? Is he random. All the experts that mention the WW themes that to his grave he denied. And the author I mentioned earlier was Farmer. He was random also.

Yes, of course. Do you understand what 'random' means?

Also Tolkien was wrong - there were **** loads of allegory in his books regardless of what he may have said publically. Once you release a work into the world, it stops being "yours".

[Imran Siddiqui]

Every observer gets to make their own judgment on it. Everyone is their own expert in that regard.

Anti-intellectualism in spades (there is a reason Kidicious thanked you for this post). People don't really know anything about technique or meaning - at some level people have their own judgement about the merits of art, but their judgement do not carry equal weight. Folks who say that Thomas Kincade is just as good an artist as Jackson Pollack have made their own judgement, but they are just wrong on the merits of the artist and the art. Knowledge of art allows folks to look at things in a deeper, more informed way.

You can believe in whatever anti-intellectual balderdash you want - I'll just laugh at you.

Every one an expert, pfft!

[N35t0r]

Once you release a work into the world, it stops being "yours".

Tell that to copyright lawyers