Dbqgolfer

I came late to this discussion, well after the ron brown-religion tangent began. I only wanted to state that I agreed with ron brown. For the record, I'm glad the kid had a positive experience @ NU & if I had a kid there @ the same time, would hope he would have contributed to the positive experience. Sorry I don't get the avery moss reference, I don't live in neb and don't read alot of threads on huskerboard. Also sorry if my comments were seen as hateful, it wasn't my intent. I'm probably not great at articulating my point of view inna forum like this(understatement). But thanks for making me feel as welcome on huskerboard as this kid did in the lockerroom (sarcasm)

They are persecuted and oppressed more than gays.

If I had to guess, these bakers would refuse to bake cakes celebrating "20 years of non-married cohabitation" or to celebrate other things they don't agree with. By the way, be careful about using the word greed. People aren't greedy, they just have a different "economic orientation"

Then are not polygamists and those who engage in interfamily sexual relations not people needing love and protected status. You know, the one's you judgementally called perverts.

I think you misunderstand my position. A gay persons sin is no worse than mine, but when you want protected status for your sin, you end up using the govt to infringe upon others rights. If you don't believe me, go read about the christian baker in Washington who is being sanctioned by the state because they don't want to provide a wedding cake for a same sex marriage. This is not just an unfortunate unintended consequence of these laws, this is exactly what the leftists behind these ordinances want, to drive, or more accuratly, BULLY, christians out of business &the public square.

Wyoming. I'm good with that.

They have the same standing as others who define themselves by their sin. Go to a job interview and proclaim yourself to be a gambling, boozing whoremonger and let me know if you get the job

You are incorrect. A person not under an employment contract or collective bargaining agreement can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all, unless they are part of a protected class, and that was what the ordinance was about, making sexual orientation a protected class.

Once again, you think that Matthew 7:5 means that Christians should never speak out against sin. And since you are so enlightened about discriminating against people based their sexual choices, I assume you also want a law protecting polygamists and interfamily sexual relations as long as mo minors are involved.

One story that was told to me by pastor on the way to a cemetery (I'm a funeral director) is that at the cemetery the American Legion was doing the Military Rites and when they fired the rifles, the elderly widow got startled and fell out of her chair. Their 5 year old grandson then yelled "son of a bitch, they shot grandma!"

So you think that Matthew 5:5,6 means that Christ doesn't want a Christian point of view expressed in the public square?

Ron Brown is exactly correct on this issue.

Thanks, I have been reading Huskerboard for several years, usually stay on the football page. I do think Robertson is getting a raw deal. Basically he said he thinks homosexuality is sinful, but treats everyone with respect. That seems to me to be the definition of "tolerance". Seems like when the left preaches tolerance, they mean submission to their point of view.

Hi, new to the board, and I can't believe my first post is going to be about this. I think people are correct that this isn't a 1st amendment issue. However, It is against the law to discriminate against someone in the area of employment based upon their religion. All Phil Robertson did is express his religious belief outside of the workplace. If A & E is on thin ice, this is where they could run into problems.