Read my 2 previous responses to you and the ones to the guy from Texas (carefully, no judgements…
Chris Cook

Read my 2 previous responses to you and the ones to the guy from Texas (carefully, no judgements while in midsentence) and you have the full answer.

I read all of it and still you do not explain how lifestyle choices are not lifestyle choices.

If you’re not willing to do that, it’s because LBGTQI sexual identity status should be equal to that of heterosexual people. But it is not in reality. So, equal protection is required for equal treatment when buying things.

Not willing? Seriously? Kinda childish, please stop that.

Hetero is a lifestyle too, it is all lifestyle, I have never claimed otherwise.

Regardless of your intent, calling it a lifestyle systematically designates LBGTQI people to lower status compared to straight people.

Not when both are lifestyle.

And, equality is not where it needs to be. So, emphasizing the civil rights and equality of LBGTQI people is essential.

By making them more important than anything or anyone else? You do not create equality by making one “special group” more important than everyone else. Especially when you destroy other people in the process.

(Your challenging me on this reminds me of when people argue for saying All Lives Matter instead of Black Lives Matter).

All lives matter to those who value them, if Black lives mattered you would see protesting and all the politicians and activists in the streets of Chicago after that report came out showing record numbers of murders, almost exclusively Blacks, and 76% unsolved.

If the only time you claim to values Black lives is when a White cop kills one, that means you are ignoring 99.99% of Black deaths, hard to claim you care that way.

I guarantee you that heteronormity ensures that you and I will be just fine.

Except for those who get their lives destroyed because they did not want to get intimately involved with a gay wedding or similar event.

I rarely if ever hear of heterosexual relationships referred to as a lifestyle. (And I never said this). Me thinks you’re having false equivalency and/or comprehension issues.

Of course it is a lifestyle, you are just desperate to try and paint alternative lifestyles as better or needing extra special protections even to the point it can destroy other people.

I never said directly involoved — that’s your term.

We were discussing people like cake makers, cake makers have to be intimately involved in the event, that was a dodge of the point.

Equal access to goods and services does not mean a merchant has to join in on some nefarious LBGTQI orgy.

Wow, that was childish, who said anything about an orgy? Stop with this garbage, we are not just talking about an over the counter sale, not 1 case is about just a basic sale, let me say this again, not 1 of these cases is about a basic sale.

All of the cases are about direct and intimate involvement in the wedding ceremony. Do you even understand what a wedding cake person has to do?

Sales involves business transactions. That’s it. No soul-searching or God forbid, “recruitment.” Just sell the damn widget and be done with it. Seems simple, but the religious right loves to project their emotional, irrational beliefs of inequality on other Americans.

You need to calm down, you are inserting all sorts of emotional garbage that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Nobody is asking for a regular sale, a normal business transaction is you come in, buy something, and leave, not 1 cake maker has ever refused that kind of business transaction, the only thing they do not want to do is be intimately involved in a gay wedding itself.

You seem to not understand that a wedding cake maker must meet with the “couple” and family, discuss intimate details of the ceremony and plans, color schemes and the theme of the wedding, usually a few small cakes are produced as color/taste samples and final designs are approved in the meetings then several hours of extremely hard work and creative art is put into that cake. Then they have to deliver the cake to the wedding itself and usually will be there for at least part of the wedding.

So, my answers are here if you really are serious about understanding the other side of it.

Seems like most of your post is personal attacks and anger.

Being LBGTQI is driven biologically but cannot be compared to criminal predators (with severe mental disorders)such as those you mentioned.

You dodged my question. Is all sexual behavior purely genetic and human beings have no control over their sexual desires? You do not like my examples but human sexuality is either a choice or it is not.

Coprophilia is not a crime, it is a sexual desire that deviant sure but still sexual desires and behaviors are considered out of the “norm” so either all sex is choice or all sex is biologically driven, you can’t have it both ways.

You are aware that being LBGTQI is no longer considered a mental disorder by DMS-5, right? That was years ago, and never should’ve been there in the first place.

Did I claim it was a mental disorder? We were talking about sexual behavior, so do you believe all sexual behavior is biological and we are hard wired to like the sex we like or is it a choice?

You can’t claim that just the sex you agree with is biological and only the sex you do not agree with is not.

I see you also dodged my point about why would gays want people who do not want to be there at their wedding in the first place? Why start out your new life with an act of hate?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.