That's exactly right, and the provision of a service to the general public is not part of exercising one's religion. Nor is the imposition of religious beliefs on others, which is where the line is drawn. It's ok to believe homosexuality is a sin, it's not ok to refuse to serve them when it is part of one's job.
No, it's not OK to refuse service to someone when it's part of service to the public. I don't think anyone, least of all me, is suggesting such a thing. If you own a bakery shop and someone, say, a gay someone, walks in and wants to buy a dozen donuts or buy a cake, you sell them whatever they want. If they have a special request,
a commissioned work, you shouldn't be forced to comply with that request if it contradicts your morals. What if you're asked to bake a cake with a pornographic image on it? What about a cake that says, "The KKK is A-OK" Would you bake that cake? What if they wanted you to bake a cake that said, "Support Gay Marriage"?
The latter one is an actual case. If you're forced to put something on a cake with which you don't agree, now you're being compelled to speak, which is the opposite of freedom of speech. You're no longer a passive, disinterested observer, but a participant in a political argument. If someone wants you to bake a wedding cake, and you make wedding cakes for a living, then you should make them a wedding cake. But unless you deliver all wedding cakes personally, you shouldn't be forced to make and deliver that particular cake if you don't want to. If someone wants to buy any cake, or a dozen donuts, or rent a room in a B&B, you're not being asked to take sides in an argument, you're a passive observer providing a service.
The "Support Gay Marriage" printed on a cake is actually a case in Northern Ireland. Happened last month. The court ruled that the Christian bakery discriminated on the basis of sexuality. This puts the state in direct opposition with religious faith, not to mention the compelling someone to speak. Ironically, a month earlier the Northern Ireland Assembly (don't confuse Northern Ireland with Ireland, they are very different places) voted against legalizing gay marriage. So what they have in Northern Ireland is a situation where the court has ruled that refusing to write a pro gay marriage slogan on a cake is discrimination, despite the fact that the slogan promotes something illegal. Lost in it all is the freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.
As an independent contractor, you can pick and choose which loads you deliver. People who do contract work for catering events, photographing events, they should be able to do the same. Would you pick up and deliver a load of T-shirts with "Free Jerry!" printed on them to the Free Jerry Sandusky Foundation? I wouldn't.
Religion is not the foundation of law, for laws predate religion.
I never said religion was the foundation for our laws.I said religion provides a structure for morality and behavior, and our laws are based on the same morals and standards of behavior.
Laws don't necessarily predate religion, as religion and laws generally arose together. What predates religion (and laws) is morality.
People have always had a general consensus on what's right and what's wrong, which law simply makes uniform, and attaches penalties for violations. That would exist regardless of any religious influence, because it's an inherent part of human nature.
Correct. If you notice, morality is remarkably consistent across all religions and all societies. From an evolutionary perspective, that means human morality is very old, certainly old enough to predate any religion that exists today. Listening to religious people, you'll hear how people need religion's instructions, or else we'd be morally clueless. God comes first, then God's Law comes to humanity, and only then can people be good. But that's simply a load of crap. People have been good, and bad, and have had morality since long before someone invented the concept of God's Law.
We are a highly social species, and always have been, in order to survive as a species, and we've been using social structures like monogamy, family, clan, and tribe. Our ancestors were using these structures at least 500,000 years ago. If you woke up tomorrow and found yourself suddenly in Indonesia about 15,000 years ago, or even in Ethiopia 150,000 years ago, you would still be able to easily figure out what is going on. The basic social roles, responsibilities, and civil rules would seem somewhat familiar to you, and you'd fit in pretty fast (assuming, of course, they don't kill you and eat you because your'e white).
As is the need to know "Why?" and religion is an age old endeavor to answer those questions.
Well, not really. Religion is more of an age old endeavor to control people than it is to answer questions. That's how and why religion and laws came about more or less in tandem with each other.
