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

[Katzndogz]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

 

[bodecea]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

 

[bodecea]

Here's a scenerio for you all to chew on.

Washington Business A sells flowers. Customer B comes in and orders flowers for a wedding that will take place at a Catholic church. Business owner A tells Customer B that they don't sell flowers nor flower arrangements to Catholics because of their personal belief system.

SO.....
1) Has Business A broken the law?

2) Does Customer A have the right to report them to the state if they have broken the law?

3) If the state finds that Business A has indeed broken the law, has the state the right to fine Business A based on the law?

4) Does Business A have the right to ignore the law and ignore the fine because they don't like it?

Why doesn't anyone want to answer these simple questions?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

I see, so you ignore this reality and substitute your own? Got it.

 

[koshergrl]

When you force people to unwillingly serve people they don't want to associate with, you have created slave market.

That argument failed to win the day, sixty years ago. Time to catch up little one.

You truly are delusional.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The willful ignorance of most conservatives concerning this issue is truly amazing.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

When you force people to unwillingly serve people they don't want to associate with, you have created slave market.

That argument failed to win the day, sixty years ago. Time to catch up little one.

You truly are delusional.

That is projection little one. Have you learned anything about rights yet? How about this case, in which your "slavery" argument died? Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v. United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[bodecea]

Here's a scenerio for you all to chew on.

Washington Business A sells flowers. Customer B comes in and orders flowers for a wedding that will take place at a Catholic church. Business owner A tells Customer B that they don't sell flowers nor flower arrangements to Catholics because of their personal belief system.

SO.....
1) Has Business A broken the law?

2) Does Customer A have the right to report them to the state if they have broken the law?

3) If the state finds that Business A has indeed broken the law, has the state the right to fine Business A based on the law?

4) Does Business A have the right to ignore the law and ignore the fine because they don't like it?

Have I inadvertently killed this thread for the RWrs here?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The willful ignorance of most conservatives concerning this issue is truly amazing.

They aren't Conservatives, they are Reactionaries. And yes, their ignorance is profound but it is also willful. Just children with their fingers stuck in their ears.

 

[koshergrl]

The willful ignorance of most conservatives concerning this issue is truly amazing.

They aren't Conservatives, they are Reactionaries. And yes, their ignorance is profound but it is also willful. Just children with their fingers stuck in their ears.

You do realize that running around saying "conservatives are big dummies" isn't an intelligent debate method, right?

I mean, you've been schooled enough times...which means you are incapable of learning.

Which means you go on ignore. You're boring.

 

[Katzndogz]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

These gays have been customers for nine years. Obviously she did not refuse them service. What she refused was her artistry. She sells flowers. They could have bought flowers. What they wanted was her talent.

Artists are being punished for not producing political art. Just like every other totalitarian government has done since Pharoah chained sculptors to blocks of stone.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The willful ignorance of most conservatives concerning this issue is truly amazing.

They aren't Conservatives, they are Reactionaries. And yes, their ignorance is profound but it is also willful. Just children with their fingers stuck in their ears.

You do realize that running around saying "conservatives are big dummies" isn't an intelligent debate method, right?

I mean, you've been schooled enough times...which means you are incapable of learning.

Which means you go on ignore. You're boring.

Yes, we all saw you get spanked so it's no surprise that you now run off crying and hiding.

 

[bodecea]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

These gays have been customers for nine years. Obviously she did not refuse them service. What she refused was her artistry. She sells flowers. They could have bought flowers. What they wanted was her talent.

Artists are being punished for not producing political art. Just like every other totalitarian government has done since Pharoah chained sculptors to blocks of stone.

Care to answer my scenerio questions, Katzndogz?

 

[Ravi]

Here's a scenerio for you all to chew on.

Washington Business A sells flowers. Customer B comes in and orders flowers for a wedding that will take place at a Catholic church. Business owner A tells Customer B that they don't sell flowers nor flower arrangements to Catholics because of their personal belief system.

SO.....
1) Has Business A broken the law?

2) Does Customer A have the right to report them to the state if they have broken the law?

3) If the state finds that Business A has indeed broken the law, has the state the right to fine Business A based on the law?

4) Does Business A have the right to ignore the law and ignore the fine because they don't like it?

Why doesn't anyone want to answer these simple questions?

1, 2, and 3 - yes
4 - no

 

[koshergrl]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

These gays have been customers for nine years. Obviously she did not refuse them service. What she refused was her artistry. She sells flowers. They could have bought flowers. What they wanted was her talent.

Artists are being punished for not producing political art. Just like every other totalitarian government has done since Pharoah chained sculptors to blocks of stone.

She also refused to endorse their marriage.

You can't yank someone's business license because they refuse to ENDORSE an event. Businesses are allowed to pick and choose who they want to publicly support.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Here's a scenerio for you all to chew on.

Washington Business A sells flowers. Customer B comes in and orders flowers for a wedding that will take place at a Catholic church. Business owner A tells Customer B that they don't sell flowers nor flower arrangements to Catholics because of their personal belief system.

SO.....
1) Has Business A broken the law?

2) Does Customer A have the right to report them to the state if they have broken the law?

3) If the state finds that Business A has indeed broken the law, has the state the right to fine Business A based on the law?

4) Does Business A have the right to ignore the law and ignore the fine because they don't like it?

Why does no one want to take this on?

Let's see if we can re-word that to include Nazi's and Jews.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

These gays have been customers for nine years. Obviously she did not refuse them service. What she refused was her artistry. She sells flowers. They could have bought flowers. What they wanted was her talent.

Artists are being punished for not producing political art. Just like every other totalitarian government has done since Pharoah chained sculptors to blocks of stone.

She refused to sell flowers for their wedding. That is a denial of service for an invalid reason there, meaning she broke the law. You'll just have to deal with it, like she does now.

 

[bodecea]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

These gays have been customers for nine years. Obviously she did not refuse them service. What she refused was her artistry. She sells flowers. They could have bought flowers. What they wanted was her talent.

Artists are being punished for not producing political art. Just like every other totalitarian government has done since Pharoah chained sculptors to blocks of stone.

She also refused to endorse their marriage.

You can't yank someone's business license because they refuse to ENDORSE an event. Businesses are allowed to pick and choose who they want to publicly support.

Selling flowers is "endorsing a marriage" now? No marriage without her flowers? My my....she sure thinks a lot of herself, doesn't she?

 

[Ravi]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

These gays have been customers for nine years. Obviously she did not refuse them service. What she refused was her artistry. She sells flowers. They could have bought flowers. What they wanted was her talent.

Artists are being punished for not producing political art. Just like every other totalitarian government has done since Pharoah chained sculptors to blocks of stone.

I just checked her website. All flowers are sold as an arrangement. She's been selling them her "artistry" for 9 years.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The florist did not refuse service to gays.

Wait....so this is much ado about nothing. She provided her services to their wedding and this is a fantasy story like on "Dallas".

These gays have been customers for nine years. Obviously she did not refuse them service. What she refused was her artistry. She sells flowers. They could have bought flowers. What they wanted was her talent.

Artists are being punished for not producing political art. Just like every other totalitarian government has done since Pharoah chained sculptors to blocks of stone.

She also refused to endorse their marriage.

You can't yank someone's business license because they refuse to ENDORSE an event. Businesses are allowed to pick and choose who they want to publicly support.

You can yank it because they broke the law, which she did.