Florist Sued for Refusing Service to Gay Couple Pens Defiant Letter Rejecting Gov’t Settlement Offer

[SassyIrishLass]

A Christian florist who was sued and found guilty of discrimination after refusing to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding isn’t planning on backing down, recently issuing a defiant letter rejecting a settlement agreement and revealing plans to appeal her case.

After Barronelle Stutzman, 70, declined a $2,001 settlement offer in a letter to the state’s attorney general on Friday, her attorney, Kristen Waggoner, senior counsel of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm, told TheBlaze on Monday that a judge’s decision that Stutzman violated anti-discrimination law will be challenged in the state court system.

As previously reported, Benton County Superior Court Judge Alex Ekstrom decided last week that Barronelle Stutzman violated Washington’s Law Against Discrimination and Consumer Protection Act when she refused service to Robert Ingersoll and his partner, Curt Freed.

The state subsequently offered a settlement in which Waggoner would only need to pay a $2,000 fine and $1 in legal fees and commit to offering flowers for gay and straight weddings, alike, if she continues providing matrimony services, the Daily Mail reported.



But the florist declined the offer, with Waggoner telling TheBlaze that nothing new or protective was afforded to her client.

“Attorney General [Bob Ferguson] has relentlessly pursued her personal and professional ruin because she will not celebrate same-sex marriage. His settlement proposal offered nothing new,” she said. “The attorney general continues to pursue her business and personal assets unless she agrees to stop designing wedding arrangements and providing wedding support services for all weddings.”

Waggoner said that the government continues to send a message that artists like Stutzman will be punished if they do not embrace gay relationships.

“The government’s message is the same: as an artist, you must use your heart, mind, and hands to promote same-sex marriage or you will lose everything,” Waggoner said.

The attorney’s comments come after Stutzman penned a response letter to Ferguson, rejecting his offer and defending her religious beliefs. In it, she wrote that it has been “exhausting” to be at the center of the controversy over the past two years and said that she never imagined that her “God-given talents and abilities” would become illegal if she refused to use them to serve same-sex weddings.

“Since 2012, same-sex couples all over the state have been free to act on their beliefs about marriage, but because I follow the Bible’s teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, I am no longer free to act on my beliefs,” she wrote.

Stutzman specifically took aim at Ferguson’s settlement offer, claiming that it shows that he truly doesn’t understand her intention to defend her religious liberty.

“Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It’s about freedom, not money,” she wrote. “I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important.”

Stutzman continued, “Washington’s constitution guarantees us ‘freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment.’ I cannot sell that precious freedom. You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for 30 pieces of silver. That is something I will not do.”

Read the letter in its entirety below:

Dear Mr. Ferguson,

Thank you for reaching out and making an offer to settle your case against me.

As you may imagine, it has been mentally and emotionally exhausting to be at the center of this controversy for nearly two years. I never imagined that using my God-given talents and abilities, and doing what I love to do for over three decades, would become illegal. Our state would be a better place if we respected each other’s differences, and our leaders protected the freedom to have those differences. Since 2012, same-sex couples all over the state have been free to act on their beliefs about marriage, but because I follow the Bible’s teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, I am no longer free to act on my beliefs.

Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It’s about freedom, not money. I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important. Washington’s constitution guarantees us “freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment.” I cannot sell that precious freedom. You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for 30 pieces of silver. That is something I will not do.

I pray that you reconsider your position. I kindly served Rob for nearly a decade and would gladly continue to do so. I truly want the best for my friend. I’ve also employed and served many members of the LGBT community, and I will continue to do so regardless of what happens with this case. You chose to attack my faith and pursue this not simply as a matter of law, but to threaten my very means of working, eating, and having a home. If you are serious about clarifying the law, then I urge you to drop your claims against my home, business, and other assets and pursue the legal claims through the appeal process. Thanks again for writing and I hope you will consider my offer.

Sincerely,

Barronelle Stutzman

Waggoner said that the letter was meant to affirm that Stutzman will not be giving up by surrendering her freedom for money.

“In what world is $2,001 a good deal for surrendering your freedom?” Waggoner said.

Florist Sued for Refusing Service to Gay Couple Pens Defiant Letter Rejecting Gov t Settlement Offer and Her Attorney Reveals What s Next TheBlaze.com

I have a wonderful solution.....arrange to have all businesses that SHE wants to buy from refuse to serve her due to her Christianity.....grocery store? Sorry. Bank? Nope. Clothing Store? Sorry, we don't serve your kind. Etc. Let's see how long that lasts.

Go ahead and try and arrange that....so stupid.

 

[Asclepias]

She has freedom of religion.

Apparently not.

No one is stopping her from practicing her religion. She just doesnt get to extend that practice to discriminating against the public sector while doing business.

It's a privately owned business, not a public sector business. People discriminate all the time, often it's the right thing to do. I turned down work for Planned Parenthood on principle. She might not want to serve pornographers either, all members of the "public sector".

If they sell to the public it doesnt matter. They will obey the laws or be penalized.

Duh. So sodomy laws were OK. Got it.

They were until they werent.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A Christian florist who was sued and found guilty of discrimination after refusing to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding isn’t planning on backing down, recently issuing a defiant letter rejecting a settlement agreement and revealing plans to appeal her case.

After Barronelle Stutzman, 70, declined a $2,001 settlement offer in a letter to the state’s attorney general on Friday, her attorney, Kristen Waggoner, senior counsel of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm, told TheBlaze on Monday that a judge’s decision that Stutzman violated anti-discrimination law will be challenged in the state court system.

As previously reported, Benton County Superior Court Judge Alex Ekstrom decided last week that Barronelle Stutzman violated Washington’s Law Against Discrimination and Consumer Protection Act when she refused service to Robert Ingersoll and his partner, Curt Freed.

The state subsequently offered a settlement in which Waggoner would only need to pay a $2,000 fine and $1 in legal fees and commit to offering flowers for gay and straight weddings, alike, if she continues providing matrimony services, the Daily Mail reported.



But the florist declined the offer, with Waggoner telling TheBlaze that nothing new or protective was afforded to her client.

“Attorney General [Bob Ferguson] has relentlessly pursued her personal and professional ruin because she will not celebrate same-sex marriage. His settlement proposal offered nothing new,” she said. “The attorney general continues to pursue her business and personal assets unless she agrees to stop designing wedding arrangements and providing wedding support services for all weddings.”

Waggoner said that the government continues to send a message that artists like Stutzman will be punished if they do not embrace gay relationships.

“The government’s message is the same: as an artist, you must use your heart, mind, and hands to promote same-sex marriage or you will lose everything,” Waggoner said.

The attorney’s comments come after Stutzman penned a response letter to Ferguson, rejecting his offer and defending her religious beliefs. In it, she wrote that it has been “exhausting” to be at the center of the controversy over the past two years and said that she never imagined that her “God-given talents and abilities” would become illegal if she refused to use them to serve same-sex weddings.

“Since 2012, same-sex couples all over the state have been free to act on their beliefs about marriage, but because I follow the Bible’s teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, I am no longer free to act on my beliefs,” she wrote.

Stutzman specifically took aim at Ferguson’s settlement offer, claiming that it shows that he truly doesn’t understand her intention to defend her religious liberty.

“Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It’s about freedom, not money,” she wrote. “I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important.”

Stutzman continued, “Washington’s constitution guarantees us ‘freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment.’ I cannot sell that precious freedom. You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for 30 pieces of silver. That is something I will not do.”

Read the letter in its entirety below:

Dear Mr. Ferguson,

Thank you for reaching out and making an offer to settle your case against me.

As you may imagine, it has been mentally and emotionally exhausting to be at the center of this controversy for nearly two years. I never imagined that using my God-given talents and abilities, and doing what I love to do for over three decades, would become illegal. Our state would be a better place if we respected each other’s differences, and our leaders protected the freedom to have those differences. Since 2012, same-sex couples all over the state have been free to act on their beliefs about marriage, but because I follow the Bible’s teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, I am no longer free to act on my beliefs.

Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It’s about freedom, not money. I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important. Washington’s constitution guarantees us “freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment.” I cannot sell that precious freedom. You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for 30 pieces of silver. That is something I will not do.

I pray that you reconsider your position. I kindly served Rob for nearly a decade and would gladly continue to do so. I truly want the best for my friend. I’ve also employed and served many members of the LGBT community, and I will continue to do so regardless of what happens with this case. You chose to attack my faith and pursue this not simply as a matter of law, but to threaten my very means of working, eating, and having a home. If you are serious about clarifying the law, then I urge you to drop your claims against my home, business, and other assets and pursue the legal claims through the appeal process. Thanks again for writing and I hope you will consider my offer.

Sincerely,

Barronelle Stutzman

Waggoner said that the letter was meant to affirm that Stutzman will not be giving up by surrendering her freedom for money.

“In what world is $2,001 a good deal for surrendering your freedom?” Waggoner said.

Florist Sued for Refusing Service to Gay Couple Pens Defiant Letter Rejecting Gov t Settlement Offer and Her Attorney Reveals What s Next TheBlaze.com

I have a wonderful solution.....arrange to have all businesses that SHE wants to buy from refuse to serve her due to her Christianity.....grocery store? Sorry. Bank? Nope. Clothing Store? Sorry, we don't serve your kind. Etc. Let's see how long that lasts.

Yes, that would be fun to see.

 

[Iceweasel]

I have a wonderful solution.....arrange to have all businesses that SHE wants to buy from refuse to serve her due to her Christianity.....grocery store? Sorry. Bank? Nope. Clothing Store? Sorry, we don't serve your kind. Etc. Let's see how long that lasts.

To you it's a wonderful solution because it's senseless. With most of the population identifying themselves as Christian it's unlikey. But I would support a Muslim run business not serving Christians. If called freedom of association. This is the kind of crap when government tries to micromanage our minds.

 

[Asclepias]

The florist sells flowers. She never refused to sell flowers. She was obeying all laws and did not discriminate.

Evidently she didnt obey all laws and thats why she lost.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Duh. So sodomy laws were OK. Got it.

I enjoy sodomy, and so does the wife...

 

[Skylar]

Stand your ground,

lol. she might as well just close up shop, she hasn't a leg to stand on.

It's a sad situation and scary when the GAYstapo gets you in their line of fire

An argument that might have some merit if she wouldn't be held in violation of the law for denying service to black folks, Christians, Muslims, or women.

But she would have. So the standard is clearly discrimination. Not the 'gaystapo'.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Christians are protected by the same law.

Christians are hated by the party - they have no protection and no rights.

 

[Iceweasel]

Apparently not.

No one is stopping her from practicing her religion. She just doesnt get to extend that practice to discriminating against the public sector while doing business.

It's a privately owned business, not a public sector business. People discriminate all the time, often it's the right thing to do. I turned down work for Planned Parenthood on principle. She might not want to serve pornographers either, all members of the "public sector".

If they sell to the public it doesnt matter. They will obey the laws or be penalized.

Duh. So sodomy laws were OK. Got it.

They were until they werent.

Yeeaaah....right.

 

[g5000]

The bigots want STRAIGHTS ONLY bakeries and florists and lunch counters.

They will need a sign like this one:

 

[Clementine]

So, your religious convictions don't help you in the workplace. Does that mean we can sue if a Muslim refuses to put bacon on our sandwich? Or can a company fire a Muslim who refuses to handle pork? Can people sue if Muslim cab drivers refuse rides to those with seeing eye dogs, drunks or Jews?

 

[Asclepias]

I have a wonderful solution.....arrange to have all businesses that SHE wants to buy from refuse to serve her due to her Christianity.....grocery store? Sorry. Bank? Nope. Clothing Store? Sorry, we don't serve your kind. Etc. Let's see how long that lasts.

To you it's a wonderful solution because it's senseless. With most of the population identifying themselves as Christian it's unlikey. But I would support a Muslim run business not serving Christians. If called freedom of association. This is the kind of crap when government tries to micromanage our minds.

Freedom of association only applies when you are not selling something to the public sector.

 

[Katzndogz]

A Christian florist who was sued and found guilty of discrimination after refusing to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding isn’t planning on backing down, recently issuing a defiant letter rejecting a settlement agreement and revealing plans to appeal her case.

After Barronelle Stutzman, 70, declined a $2,001 settlement offer in a letter to the state’s attorney general on Friday, her attorney, Kristen Waggoner, senior counsel of the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal firm, told TheBlaze on Monday that a judge’s decision that Stutzman violated anti-discrimination law will be challenged in the state court system.

As previously reported, Benton County Superior Court Judge Alex Ekstrom decided last week that Barronelle Stutzman violated Washington’s Law Against Discrimination and Consumer Protection Act when she refused service to Robert Ingersoll and his partner, Curt Freed.

The state subsequently offered a settlement in which Waggoner would only need to pay a $2,000 fine and $1 in legal fees and commit to offering flowers for gay and straight weddings, alike, if she continues providing matrimony services, the Daily Mail reported.



But the florist declined the offer, with Waggoner telling TheBlaze that nothing new or protective was afforded to her client.

“Attorney General [Bob Ferguson] has relentlessly pursued her personal and professional ruin because she will not celebrate same-sex marriage. His settlement proposal offered nothing new,” she said. “The attorney general continues to pursue her business and personal assets unless she agrees to stop designing wedding arrangements and providing wedding support services for all weddings.”

Waggoner said that the government continues to send a message that artists like Stutzman will be punished if they do not embrace gay relationships.

“The government’s message is the same: as an artist, you must use your heart, mind, and hands to promote same-sex marriage or you will lose everything,” Waggoner said.

The attorney’s comments come after Stutzman penned a response letter to Ferguson, rejecting his offer and defending her religious beliefs. In it, she wrote that it has been “exhausting” to be at the center of the controversy over the past two years and said that she never imagined that her “God-given talents and abilities” would become illegal if she refused to use them to serve same-sex weddings.

“Since 2012, same-sex couples all over the state have been free to act on their beliefs about marriage, but because I follow the Bible’s teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, I am no longer free to act on my beliefs,” she wrote.

Stutzman specifically took aim at Ferguson’s settlement offer, claiming that it shows that he truly doesn’t understand her intention to defend her religious liberty.

“Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It’s about freedom, not money,” she wrote. “I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important.”

Stutzman continued, “Washington’s constitution guarantees us ‘freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment.’ I cannot sell that precious freedom. You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for 30 pieces of silver. That is something I will not do.”

Read the letter in its entirety below:

Dear Mr. Ferguson,

Thank you for reaching out and making an offer to settle your case against me.

As you may imagine, it has been mentally and emotionally exhausting to be at the center of this controversy for nearly two years. I never imagined that using my God-given talents and abilities, and doing what I love to do for over three decades, would become illegal. Our state would be a better place if we respected each other’s differences, and our leaders protected the freedom to have those differences. Since 2012, same-sex couples all over the state have been free to act on their beliefs about marriage, but because I follow the Bible’s teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, I am no longer free to act on my beliefs.

Your offer reveals that you don’t really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It’s about freedom, not money. I certainly don’t relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important. Washington’s constitution guarantees us “freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment.” I cannot sell that precious freedom. You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for 30 pieces of silver. That is something I will not do.

I pray that you reconsider your position. I kindly served Rob for nearly a decade and would gladly continue to do so. I truly want the best for my friend. I’ve also employed and served many members of the LGBT community, and I will continue to do so regardless of what happens with this case. You chose to attack my faith and pursue this not simply as a matter of law, but to threaten my very means of working, eating, and having a home. If you are serious about clarifying the law, then I urge you to drop your claims against my home, business, and other assets and pursue the legal claims through the appeal process. Thanks again for writing and I hope you will consider my offer.

Sincerely,

Barronelle Stutzman

Waggoner said that the letter was meant to affirm that Stutzman will not be giving up by surrendering her freedom for money.

“In what world is $2,001 a good deal for surrendering your freedom?” Waggoner said.

Florist Sued for Refusing Service to Gay Couple Pens Defiant Letter Rejecting Gov t Settlement Offer and Her Attorney Reveals What s Next TheBlaze.com

I have a wonderful solution.....arrange to have all businesses that SHE wants to buy from refuse to serve her due to her Christianity.....grocery store? Sorry. Bank? Nope. Clothing Store? Sorry, we don't serve your kind. Etc. Let's see how long that lasts.

She never refused to sell them flowers. She had sold them flowers for nine years.

A closer analogy would be if a Christian went to a gay florist and asked for an arrangement with a banner that said "God hates fags".

Should that gay florist have to use his artistry to create such an arrangement?

 

[Asclepias]

So, your religious convictions don't help you in the workplace. Does that mean we can sue if a Muslim refuses to put bacon on our sandwich? Or can a company fire a Muslim who refuses to handle pork? Can people sue if Muslim cab drivers refuse rides to those with seeing eye dogs, drunks or Jews?

Sure you can sue if they sell bacon sandwiches to other customers.

 

[bodecea]

Stand your ground,

lol. she might as well just close up shop, she hasn't a leg to stand on.

It's a sad situation and scary when the GAYstapo gets you in their line of fire

You realize the law she broke has been around for quite a while and isn't just to protect gay people.....did you complain about PA laws like this before now?

 

[Katzndogz]

So, your religious convictions don't help you in the workplace. Does that mean we can sue if a Muslim refuses to put bacon on our sandwich? Or can a company fire a Muslim who refuses to handle pork? Can people sue if Muslim cab drivers refuse rides to those with seeing eye dogs, drunks or Jews?

Good luck in getting a halal restaurant to cater a bar mitzvah.

 

[HenryBHough]

A closer analogy would be if a Christian went to a gay florist and asked for an arrangement with a banner that said "God hates fags".

Should that gay florist have to use his artistry to create such an arrangement?

Yup.

No question.

HUGE damages to be paid which then could be donated to some church and become tax-deductible!

 

[g5000]

So, your religious convictions don't help you in the workplace. Does that mean we can sue if a Muslim refuses to put bacon on our sandwich?

Only if he sells bacon sandwiches and refuses to make one for you.

Or can a company fire a Muslim who refuses to handle pork?

Would a Muslim get a job handling pork?

Can people sue if Muslim cab drivers refuse rides to those with seeing eye dogs, drunks or Jews?

Yes, for the blind and Jews. No for drunks.

 

[BlindBoo]

Oh please.

The homo brigade is so incredibly stupid, they think they will win this battle.

They won't. They are a TINY minority...and the VAST majority of Americans has absolutely ZERO desire to accommodate their increasingly oppressive demands.

They're gonna oppress you by forcing you to accept money for flowers for their weddings? ....... Muh-ha-ha.

 

[Asclepias]

So, your religious convictions don't help you in the workplace. Does that mean we can sue if a Muslim refuses to put bacon on our sandwich? Or can a company fire a Muslim who refuses to handle pork? Can people sue if Muslim cab drivers refuse rides to those with seeing eye dogs, drunks or Jews?

Good luck in getting a halal restaurant to cater a bar mitzvah.

If they dont you can sue.