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

"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.
 
If the florist felt supplying flowers for something that violates her beliefs she has every right to refuse
Actually she doesn't, hence why she lost in court.
She's appealing, so her "loss" is no more of a loss than those gays in the 6th circuit federal court of appeals until the Fat Lady sings. Or is justice only a one-sided affair now that the 4th Reicht is rolling into the 1940s?
If the florist felt supplying flowers for something that violates her beliefs she has every right to refuse
Actually she doesn't, hence why she lost in court.
And yet her lawyers believe she has a case for appeal. This will go all the way to the Supreme Court and they will strike down all your unconstitutional laws that attempt to make the Constitution void in business. Hobby Lobby was a warning, now the hammer comes down.

Then she should appeal and take it all the way. Of course, that is counter to the concept of state's rights. The feds are going to step in and tell a state what laws it can or cannot have?

Why not? They are doing it with SSM

Oh, I am all for it. I am a proponent of a strong national government. It's nice to see you are as well.

I think the government gets involved in things they shouldn't and the result is the homo mess
 
"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.
There's more drama queen in you than in all of Castro Street
 
The homo lobby has had their fit and insisted that marriage is not religious....but that's not going to stop people from seeing it as a sacrament.

And as such, their right to abstain from participation in events that make a mockery of it is protected. They object and refrain from participating on religious grounds.

And yes, that includes business owners, doctors, florists, bakers, priests, cops. Just because they work does not mean they can be forced to participate in what they see as sacrilege, unless they are actually inflicting HARM to someone by their abstinence. And that is NOT the case here. Nobody is going to die because the homos need to get bakers who have no religious objection to their nuptials. There are lots of bakers who would jump at the chance to make a penis-shaped cake, and have to shove the staggering queens out of the way to get the cake to the table...there are lots of queer florists who revel in the chance to drape garlands around the necks of nude statues. Nobody's hurting you if they just say no.
 
"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.
Sorry, your fantasy baptism would not force a priest in attendance since the church doesn't allow homosexual's to be members.

Good luck with it, though.
 
"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.
Sorry, your fantasy baptism would not force a priest in attendance since the church doesn't allow homosexual's to be members.

Good luck with it, though.

But according to the homo lobby, the priest is an employee of the church, and the church makes linens for profit...so the priest is legally bound to hand out towels to naked queers, and to smile while he does it.
 
Otherwise, painter will send a strongly worded and creepy fax to the Vatican, and a bunch of dyke lawyers will sue the parrish.
 
"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.
Sorry, your fantasy baptism would not force a priest in attendance since the church doesn't allow homosexual's to be members.

Good luck with it, though.

But according to the homo lobby, the priest is an employee of the church, and the church makes linens for profit...so the priest is legally bound to hand out towels to naked queers, and to smile while he does it.
No, it doesn't work that way.
 
"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.
Sorry, your fantasy baptism would not force a priest in attendance since the church doesn't allow homosexual's to be members.

Good luck with it, though.

But according to the homo lobby, the priest is an employee of the church, and the church makes linens for profit...so the priest is legally bound to hand out towels to naked queers, and to smile while he does it.
No, it doesn't work that way.

So we agree.

You can't force people to participate in rituals that have religious significance. Even if you are just making fun of it.
 
Last edited:
Otherwise, painter will send a strongly worded and creepy fax to the Vatican, and a bunch of dyke lawyers will sue the parrish.
The priests are still busy, raping small children and then hiding from them with the blessings of the church.
 
Last edited:
Otherwise, painter will send a strongly worded and creepy fax to the Vatican, and a bunch of dyke lawyers will sue the parrish.
Or blackmail a Pope...oh, wait, they already unseated a Pope...a couple of governors and now the 4th Reicht is after a popular conservative TV entertainer's career.
 
Otherwise, painter will send a strongly worded and creepy fax to the Vatican, and a bunch of dyke lawyers will sue the parrish.
Or blackmail a Pope...oh, wait, they already unseated a Pope...a couple of governors and now the 4th Reicht is after a popular conservative TV entertainer's career.
Pride goeth before the fall...
 
Otherwise, painter will send a strongly worded and creepy fax to the Vatican, and a bunch of dyke lawyers will sue the parrish.
Or blackmail a Pope...oh, wait, they already unseated a Pope...a couple of governors and now the 4th Reicht is after a popular conservative TV entertainer's career.
Pride goeth before the fall...
Words YOU ought to pay attention to...

Is that a threat?
 
"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.

No, it isn't.
 
15th post
Actually she doesn't, hence why she lost in court.
She's appealing, so her "loss" is no more of a loss than those gays in the 6th circuit federal court of appeals until the Fat Lady sings. Or is justice only a one-sided affair now that the 4th Reicht is rolling into the 1940s?
Actually she doesn't, hence why she lost in court.
And yet her lawyers believe she has a case for appeal. This will go all the way to the Supreme Court and they will strike down all your unconstitutional laws that attempt to make the Constitution void in business. Hobby Lobby was a warning, now the hammer comes down.

Then she should appeal and take it all the way. Of course, that is counter to the concept of state's rights. The feds are going to step in and tell a state what laws it can or cannot have?

Why not? They are doing it with SSM

Oh, I am all for it. I am a proponent of a strong national government. It's nice to see you are as well.

I think the government gets involved in things they shouldn't and the result is the homo mess

So you don't think the store owner should be able to take this to the SC then?
 
"I choose to make this priest attend my homosexual lover's "baptism" and hand out towels as we step naked out of the Jacuzzi, then perform ritual fellatio. After all, he belongs to a religion where nuns participate in selling hand stitched linen..."

That's the prog fascist concept of homo choice.
Sorry, your fantasy baptism would not force a priest in attendance since the church doesn't allow homosexual's to be members.

Good luck with it, though.

But according to the homo lobby, the priest is an employee of the church, and the church makes linens for profit...so the priest is legally bound to hand out towels to naked queers, and to smile while he does it.
No, it doesn't work that way.

So we agree.

You can't force people to participate in rituals that have religious significance. Even if you are just making fun of it.

No, you can't. But, of course, in this case no one was saying the florist had to attend the wedding. Just sell flowers.
 
If the florist felt supplying flowers for something that violates her beliefs she has every right to refuse
Actually she doesn't, hence why she lost in court.
And yet her lawyers believe she has a case for appeal. This will go all the way to the Supreme Court and they will strike down all your unconstitutional laws that attempt to make the Constitution void in business. Hobby Lobby was a warning, now the hammer comes down.

You know what- if the Supreme Court decides that this state law is unconstitutional- well then I will accept that the Supreme Court decision is binding on state law, and that the law is unconstitutional.

When the Supreme Court decides that state marriage law is unconstitutional- what will your position be about the Supreme Court and State law then?
I'm eager to get a decision on that. Are you sure you are?

Absolutely.

Doesn't mean I am sure I will agree with the court's decision, but looking more and more likely I will.

However the court rules though- I will accept it.

So once again :
When the Supreme Court decides that state marriage law is unconstitutional- what will your position be about the Supreme Court and State law then?
 
Otherwise, painter will send a strongly worded and creepy fax to the Vatican, and a bunch of dyke lawyers will sue the parrish.
Or blackmail a Pope...oh, wait, they already unseated a Pope...a couple of governors and now the 4th Reicht is after a popular conservative TV entertainer's career.
Pride goeth before the fall...
Words YOU ought to pay attention to...

Is that a threat?
No, that's what they actually did. Might want to read a couple of my posts first. :redface:
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom