Couple must pay lesbian couple $1500 each, on top of 10K fine

[Angel4Truth]

Clergy in New York are able to opt out of performing same sex marriages, according to that same link, so it's not an issue there.

That is the issue, the fact that they wouldn't perform their wedding, it was not a matter of them providing rental areas, but that they would not host it.

They still offered to provide the space for their reception.

I guarantee you on appeal they will win this.

 

[musterion]

What is it about their demeanor in the photograph that has you in such hysterics?

Exactly the thing that doesn't bother you.

 

[Jose Fly]

Marrying someone in your home, and hosting a reception are different things, these pervs were even told at the time they were welcome to have their reception there, but that the giffords would not marry them because of their religious beliefs, it wasnt about the venue, but about their religious beliefs and marrying them.

If they're a public business, by law they have to be open to....the public. Not too difficult to understand.

Gay doesn't have the right to trump the constitution on freedom of speech and religion. Those are guaranteed rights, gay is not a guaranteed right.

If you open a public business, you have to be open to....the public. Not too difficult to understand.

 

[musterion]

Then you believe a catholic priest should be forced to host a gay marriage?

Priests can preside at their own marriages?

 

[Angel4Truth]

If they're a public business, by law they have to be open to....the public. Not too difficult to understand.

And they offered the space for reception, no discrimination.

What don't you understand, all they wouldn't do, is marry them and they shouldn't have to check their religion at the door.

Want to make a wager in the end who will win this one?

 

[annabenedetti]

Exactly the thing that doesn't bother you.

That they're holding hands? Really? You're ready to follow your dog under the couch over that?

 

[Angel4Truth]

Priests can preside at their own marriages?

?

 

[annabenedetti]

That is the issue, the fact that they wouldn't perform their wedding, it was not a matter of them providing rental areas, but that they would not host it.

They still offered to provide the space for their reception.

I guarantee you on appeal they will win this.

They're still providing a venue for receptions for same sex couples celebrating their union. And receiving compensation for it. There's a definite dissonance there.

 

[GFR7]

Exactly the thing that doesn't bother you.

That's an apt way of putting it, brother. :thumb:

 

[musterion]

?

Then you believe a catholic priest should be forced to host [their own] gay marriage?

 

[mighty_duck]

yes, its very interesting that the gays couldn't be satisfied with that, but demand that people go against their religion and marry them, you know like many of them claim they would never do, if they were given the right to marry....

They didn't ask the Gifford's to marry them. They asked to rent their location, same as any other couple.

Denying them based on their sexual orientation is discrimination. Pretty cut and dried.

 

[Jose Fly]

And they offered the space for reception, no discrimination.

What don't you understand, all they wouldn't do, is marry them and they shouldn't have to check their religion at the door.

Are their wedding services a paid service that's open to the public?

 

[Angel4Truth]

They didn't ask the Gifford's to marry them. They asked to rent their location, same as any other couple.
.

They are who marry them, which is why they cited their beliefs on it. They weren't refused the location for reception, and they had gays who worked for them as well.

They don't have to check their religious beliefs which are guaranteed by the constitution.

You dont seem to understand that wedding chappels and honeymoon resorts and such usually have the hosts perform wedding services. Most often the host of the property is certified to perform weddings.

 

[Uberpod1]

What a lovely couple......... not. lain:
What a racket. :nono:

Nothing wrong with plus size women. Just more of them to love ...

 

[Angel4Truth]

They will win this on appeal, who wants to bet on it?

 

[GFR7]

Nothing wrong with plus size women. Just more of them to love ...

Not the plus size that's a problem. And they don't want your love , or mine, or any other man's. You know? :think:

 

[GFR7]

They will win this on appeal, who wants to bet on it?

:BRAVO: 'Atta girl!!!!!opcorn:

 

[annabenedetti]

Not the plus size that's a problem. And they don't want your love , or mine, or any other man's. You know? :think:

The problem is that through your words, you and Musterion show that you look down your nose at them, you consider yourself better than them.

Maybe because you're a Luke 18:11 kind of Christian.

 

[mighty_duck]

They are who marry them, which is why they cited their beliefs on it. They weren't refused the location for reception, and they had gays who worked for them as well.

They don't have to check their religious beliefs which are guaranteed by the constitution.

You dont seem to understand that wedding chappels and honeymoon resorts and such usually have the hosts perform wedding services. Most often the host of the property is certified to perform weddings.

You are misreading this. Show me one cite where the Giffords were asked to conduct the marriage ceremony. Good luck!

They were just providing the location. Even the right wing sites reporting on this ceremony don't claim they were asked to marry the gay couple.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...74C4Bg&usg=AFQjCNFGwSWnb3b39auAB88rUCBa3fNhHw

http://www.christiantoday.com/artic...eremonies.after.gay.couples.lawsuit/40212.htm

 

[GFR7]

The problem is that you through your words, you and Musterion show that you look down your nose at them, you consider yourself better than them.

Maybe because you're a Luke 18:11 kind of Christian.

Not really. Can't you scorn someone's behavior (say, a meth addict) without necessarily thinking of yourself as "superior"? :think: I don't like lesbians for a number of reasons, which I feel are well-founded.