p.17 #2 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Then I repeat:
Just curious, would anyone here actually think that it would be okay if a lesbian couple walked into a coffee shop and were told that they would not get service because they are lesbians or asked to leave?
If this isn't okay (and our government and common sense say it isn't) why would it be okay for certain services to do this?
Apr 14, 2008 at 08:27 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #3 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
shelleyc wrote:
Steve:
Yes I would photograph a wedding between a Christian and non-Christian. Why... because it is very possible, and happens often, that through the one spouse, the other does come to know Christ as their personal savior, and God richly blesses the marriage. But between homosexual couples, if they recognize they are going against God's will, the marriage would need to terminate. God would not bless a relationship that he has forbid. So, really, I wouldn't be showing them any love by taking the photos.On the contrary, I would actually be doing them a disservice.
Hi Shelley,
So when 2 Corinthians 6:14 teaches that, "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common?" you do not believe that this passage forbids the marriage of believers and unbelievers? What do you think this passage means if it does not forbid the marriage of believers and unbelievers?
If I may, I would like to ask another question. Would you shoot a wedding in which a man left his wife to marry another woman or vice versa? A situation that is not all that uncommon. I guess what I am trying to understand is whether you would shoot any heterosexual marriage and no homosexual commitment ceremony, which seems to be what you are saying.
p.17 #4 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
saturnkk wrote: Then I repeat:
Just curious, would anyone here actually think that it would be okay if a lesbian couple walked into a coffee shop and were told that they would not get service because they are lesbians or asked to leave?
If this isn't okay (and our government and common sense say it isn't) why would it be okay for certain services to do this?
p.17 #7 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
The bible on homosexuals:
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)
And if you are a good christian wedding photog and find out the bride to be is not a virgin well, do your duty to god:
But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)
Let us not forget this classic:
(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
But I digress from what is truly important, let's talk more about how astronomers have changed Pluto's status from a planet or why it is okay to lock your store to homosexuals, by all means.
Edited by saturnkk on Apr 14, 2008 at 08:55 PM GMT
p.17 #8 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
DragonflyDM wrote:
What I am saying is that if a Christian is going to not shoot a ceremony because it is endorsing a sin-- then the act of the ceremony should somehow be part of a homosexual act. Since the state doesn't have gay marriage, and the church doesn't have gay marriage-- then it isn't a marriage ceremony. No need to seek God's blessing, and no official legal contractual State sponsored ceremony.
And since these two people are just committing to their love for each other, and not actually doing a homosexual act-- this is just a party with the declaration of love between two people (who happen to be of the same sex).
There isn't any sin in the event, because it isn't a ceremony, a contract, or a sexual act. What was being objected to, was that Christians documenting two homosexuals declaring their love for each other (and this is love they are declaring not sexual orientation), would be an endorsement of sin.
But they aren't asking for God's marriage, or a State Marriage-- so they are just two people saying "I love you."
So unless you are just objecting to their existence and their potential for doing something homosexual a some other time and place (which means you must reject them in ALL ASPECTS of their life, not just the commitment event), there shouldn't be any objection to shooting their event. ...Show more →
Your reasoning is convoluted at best. If you actually believe that the couple in question will only look upon their "declaration" as a party and not a marriage or union, I think you are sadly mistaken.
The scriptures (or any other text, empirical scientific data of your choice) can be interpreted, twisted, morphed and changed to try prove almost any point of view you wish. Doing so doesn't make your view of the scriptures or teachings of Christianity factual or correct.
There has been quite a bit of commentary about how we shouldn't be judgmental, prejudiced or discriminatory. Yet there seems to be considerable judging and discriminating of those who disagree on this matter.
Personally, I could care less if someone wants to "declare their love" for the ficus plant in the foyer. It should be my choice and my choice alone if I choose to photograph that declaration. Regardless of whether I divulge that it is my religious beliefs that are the reason for that decision or not.
By refusing to do so does not diminish the ability of that person to love that ficus plant in any manner they choose too. It also does not diminish that person's capacity to acquire the services of another qualified photographer to record the blessed event. It certainly doesn't deprive that person from existing.
p.17 #9 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
butchM wrote:
Personally, I could care less if someone wants to "declare their love" for the ficus plant in the foyer. It should be my choice and my choice alone if I choose to photograph that declaration. Regardless of whether I divulge that it is my religious beliefs that are the reason for that decision or not
For a ficus okay. For an African american, Asian, homosexual = not okay.
You don't have the right to discriminate at your leisure. The government has some laws set-up to protect us. If you show a provable pattern of discriminating against minorities you will be prosecuted... ask Denny's.
p.17 #10 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
I am just taking the argument to its conclusion. I think I have been VERY clear, that if you are going to claim the scriptures as a basis of your argument for behavior, that is should be consistant. I think if you are consistant 100% with scripture, then you should be totally justified in your position.
However, there isn't a single Christian in America that follows 100% of the Bible. The bible justifies slavery. It advocates stoning sinners (in some cases demands it). It is against safe sex (I hope you never used a condom and "spilt your seed.") Etc. etc.
Unfortunately, Christians pick and choose the sins they are offended by.
As far as the ficus plant, I agree that anyone should be allowed to declare their love for a ficus, and that anyone should be allowed to turn down that job. HOWEVER, if there is a anti-discrimination law for plant lovers-- a photographer doesn't have the right to turn down that job BECAUSE of a man's love for a plant.
butchM wrote:
Your reasoning is convoluted at best. If you actually believe that the couple in question will only look upon their "declaration" as a party and not a marriage or union, I think you are sadly mistaken.
The scriptures (or any other text, empirical scientific data of your choice) can be interpreted, twisted, morphed and changed to try prove almost any point of view you wish. Doing so doesn't make your view of the scriptures or teachings of Christianity factual or correct.
There has been quite a bit of commentary about how we shouldn't be judgmental, prejudiced or discriminatory. Yet there seems to be considerable judging and discriminating of those who disagree on this matter.
Personally, I could care less if someone wants to "declare their love" for the ficus plant in the foyer. It should be my choice and my choice alone if I choose to photograph that declaration. Regardless of whether I divulge that it is my religious beliefs that are the reason for that decision or not.
By refusing to do so does not diminish the ability of that person to love that ficus plant in any manner they choose too. It also does not diminish that person's capacity to acquire the services of another qualified photographer to record the blessed event. It certainly doesn't deprive that person from existing.
p.17 #11 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
saturnkk wrote:
For a ficus okay. For an African american, Asian, homosexual = not okay.
You don't have the right to discriminate at your leisure. The government has some laws set-up to protect us. If you show a provable pattern of discriminating against minorities you will be prosecuted... ask Denny's.
Never said that would be my choice not to accept such work, only that it is my choice.
It also has not been proven in a court of law as yet that the case in question is a bona fide case of discrimination. Thus far it is the decision of a three member tribunal, not a judge and jury.
p.17 #18 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
DragonflyDM wrote:
But the Bible quotes Jesus often as saying that no one should be the one to judge anyone. Not to judge the adulterous women, or anyone. In fact, read Matthews and you will see that it says clearly that the judgments you hold against other people are the judgments and measuring sticks that will be held against you and that those who judge are hypocrites.
Well....actually if you keep reading in Matthew 7 Jesus talks about recognizing false prophets and saying that you will recognize them by their fruits. So, yes, we are to judge and be discerning while at the same time recognizing that we should use proper standards and motivation when judging (your quote from earlier in that chapter). I suppose that a lot of this argument is about what or whose standards to use.
One last point - I have two friends who were lesbians (not partners - they don't know each other). One turned away from that lifestyle after 20 years and is now celibate. The other also turned away from the lesbian lifestyle and is now happily married and has two children. If the homosexual lifestyle is inborn, why are there people who no longer live it?
p.17 #20 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
crteach wrote:
One last point - I have two friends who were lesbians (not partners - they don't know each other). One turned away from that lifestyle after 20 years and is now celibate. The other also turned away from the lesbian lifestyle and is now happily married and has two children. If the homosexual lifestyle is inborn, why are there people who no longer live it?
Societal pressure.
Religious Pressure.
Sexual uncertainty.
Denial.
Same reasons some homosexual men get married, have kids, then leave there wife for another man.
