An interesting argument that is, unfortunately, all to rare.

Like leftists?

It fits perfectly in with Mohammeds line of thinking.

Well, they do have a lot in common.

Or, how about the real issue, my religion says same-sex marriage is sinful therefore don't force me to accept it, celebrate it or be a part of it.

Most Christians always had a problem with abortion, it only became an issue when it became legal.

Actually, there's some fairly serious and heavyweight scientific and philosophical thought on this very question that says life may indeed be a LARP of some kind. I mean, if we're all a simulation in a superhyperultrafantasticwowiezowiemagnificent computer, LARP is exactly what life is.

Is this an issue? What gay people are trying to force you to be a part of their marriage?

Don't you know about the roving gangs of gay people forcing innocent heteros into their sick and twisted world? Why, they lurk around every corner! It ain't safe to wear assless chaps any more!

Also, all chaps are assless.

Not being allowed by society to flip them the double bird, scream "faggoooootts!!", and throw their wedding cake on the floor is oppression, you know.

Can someone please change to to too in the title?

My religion says being a bigoted asshole is sinful, therefore don't force me to accept it, celebrate it or be a part of it.

I tend to agree with Van Jones on most things, but I also think that he gives a little too much credit to the other side. There are some principled people that vote GOP and would never dream of voting for a DEM... those people I at least respect. But there are a lot of people that vote GOP who are just poorly informed and there's nothing you can do to change it because they don't want to be changed.

For instance, when Net Neutrality was last in the news in 2015, I had a friend that I played Playstation games with online that swore up and down that "Frikkin' OBAMA"... was going to chop up the internet and sell it to the highest bidder and that would jack up our prices. When I tried to explain to him that no, Obama's legislation supported keeping the net open with equal access to all no matter who you did business with he refused to believe it. I implored him to just google it and he screamed liberal media bias. I asked him where he got his news from and I don't remember but I asked him to hold them accountable when Net Neutrality passes and the doomsday they predicted didn't come true. Wouldn't you know it, according to his news source, Obama's internet bill failed thanks to that site's hard hitting coverage of the issue, never mind the fact that in reality, Obama's protections is what kept things the same. I gave up. This wasn't a "dumb" guy. He had chosen a "team" and chose to follow media that told him he made the correct choice. And when that team didn't serve his interest, they lied and said they did.

Not me personally but let's ask some bakers, photographers, florists how they have been affected.

They were affected because they discriminated against a group of people, and suffered the fallout from that. You reap what you sow.

The first amendment means nothing to you?

Should a doctor be able to deny services to a person because they're gay?

Yep.
You can be a bigot all you want at your supper table, the trouble comes in when you want to take it outside to play.

You can say "I don't bake cakes for gays," but that doesn't mean you are guaranteed continued business as a result. Words have consequences. You decided being gay/black/female/left-handed was a sin and evil, so you spoke up. Accept the consequences of those actions. See, you seem to be under the impression that the first amendment guarantees you a right to shove your religion onto others. It doesn't.

Can I please stop hearing this bullshit of "my deeply held beliefs", as a substitute for "I'm a fucking bigot, and I like it"?

Who gives a fuck if you deeply hold it?
That doesn't change the meaning of things.

If God tells you to kill someone, it's still killing.
If God tells you to plunder a conquered land, it's still called plunder.

There's no new-speak for that shit.

But for intolerance, we suddenly need this gilding of the lily to make it seem noble.
Grow a fucking backbone, and own what you are.

Exactly. Back in the 1800s, a significant portion of the U.S. had the deeply held belief that it was their Christian duty to be masters over black people. Didn't make it right.

Considering the Bible barely touches on homosexuality and has numerous gay characters, the religious right perseverates on it like there's no tomorrow. I wonder why.

No, it's not. Only people who believe they themselves are God arrive to such erroneous conclusions.

Doesn't matter to the person who was killed.

Thou art God. May you never be thirsty.

That's of no consequence. You would know that if you understood what I said.

What numerous gay characters?

Ok...

It is of consequence to the one who was killed. Your interpretation of God isn't any more authoritative than the one who murdered another human being. Maybe in your head, but in reality, it's just as unsupported as any other delusion.

You know.