Genesis Deuteronomy, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Galatians, Philemon, 1 timothy and a bunch of other places.
Can you actually back that assertion up? Give me the specifics of the passages in question.
the bible forbids dozens of things that modern Christians have no trouble with.
Such as?
If you are a business denying someone goods/services because they are a member of a minority then you are the one being the jerk.
I don't disagree. But if you are denying it because they are asking you to celebrate something you view as a deviant perversion and you deny that request then you are simply staying true to yourself.
No a bigot would try to associate a minority with murder, child molestation, adultery and rape
So God's a bigot because He equated homosexuality with other sexual deviancy and commanded the death penalty for it?
Just to clarify I do not agree with the defining of homosexuals as a minority. They come in all sorts.
:doh:
There is a poster on TOL who gos by the name "Quincy." He is not a Christian and he does not agree with fundamentalists on the issue of homosexuality as per the deviant nature of such. He started a thread a while back wherein he discussed the fluidity of sexual orientation.
Not to mention the number of homosexuals who say they made a choice.
So, the answer is no, you cannot prove otherwise
See above.
"Sarcasm: the last defense of the truly witless" - John G. Pollard
Well, Pollard was clearly a fool.
I didn't assume anything
as·sume verb
1.suppose to be the case, without proof.
2. take or begin to have (power or responsibility).
Yes you did. You assumed homosexuality was as natural as those other things.
So basically the fundamentalist Christians are asking for an exemption from anti-discrimination laws. They want to be able to discriminate against a protected class (gays) and not be subject to any penalty.
Do the fundamentalists want that exemption just for themselves, or would they be willing to allow it for any type of religious belief?
Not just religious beliefs. No class, or race, or any group of people should be protected more than any other. And no one should receive special protection just because of what they happen to be. If someone actually causes them physical harm, for whatever reason, then there should be recourse. Otherwise no. And motive should not matter beyond showing that motive existed.
