I believe there is a possible misconception here. Jesus associated with sinners while he lived on Earth, if we are to believe the Biblical account which is composed of eye witness accounts. Nowhere does it endorse bigotry. However, neither does it endorse sin. The ideas in the Bible are stunningly applicable to the modern world. Where it gets foggy is, as mentioned in the OP, with cases such as the baker. His decision was perhaps not entirely Biblical, however he did interpret holy texts as such: he owns a Christian business, and because of this, he must be upholding values through this venue. Christian theology claims homosexuality to be immoral. Perhaps the equivalent in Jesus' time was the tax collector. One of Jesus' close followers was a tax collector, and Jesus didn't endorse his greed by allowing him to handle the money of the group, but rather he accepted him with open arms and loved him, encouraging him to let go of his sin and enabling him to grow morally. As such, the baker, through his own interpretation, decided he would offer an alternative, trying to love while not endorsing the sin, and enabling it.
Contraception is a matter of life and death in the third world. Aids and std's would have wiped out a good percentage of the population without.
Most spoken lines by patients "he/she doesn't like needles" "I don't like needles"
LOL, yeah I messed up with bangs too.
A good example of the majority argument being moot is Aceh, Indonesia. They didn't have Sharia 25 years ago. Now they have it (limited edition). The number of insurgents never exceeded 1% of population even at peak of insurgency. The overwhelmingly peaceful majority simply accepted the change, because they wouldn't oppose Koran and Muhammad's Sunna.
"If it's not a personal question: are you a virgin?"
Airing the scuttlebutt about McCain is certainly politically motivated; however, there has to be some truth behind it for it to stick.
Did you read Revelations? That novel ends in a ricorso: returning to, even amplifying the narcissist daddy of the OT.
They aren't opinions. The bible functions rather like any historical fiction novel, like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. Same concept. Take a normal, real person, then apply mystical, fantastical qualities to him then write a story around it.
Yeah, I'm not putting my mouth on or my tongue in anyone's asshole. Nope. Nuh-uh. No indeed. Hell no.