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

[Syriusly]

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

Unless they were Muslim. .

It would be exactly the same- no- a Christian can't refuse to sell to a person just because they are a Muslim.

A Muslim cannot refuse to sell to someone just because they are a Jew.

Just the same.

 

[MaryL]

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

Unless they were Muslim. Then people would pee themselves as to which side to pander to, the gays or the muslims.Here in America, gays aren't exactly having their human rights trampled on if they don't get a flora arrangement or a cake made to their specifications when in other cultures and in a different time they would have been treated in a more profoundly different way. Suing over this stupidity is so petty. That is what this culture has come to.

 

[Syriusly]

It might have begun as a religious ceremony but religion has NOTHING to do with the government extending a right to 2 individuals who want to be in a relationship together.

So, the government took a religious ceremony and secularized it. Perfect!!

You have never been to Vegas have you?

 

[Nosmo King]

I wonder what they think goes on at a same sex wedding?

I've been to two of them, both Lesbian weddings. So far as I could tell, they were typical weddings. One had a band, so I enjoyed it better than the other that had a DJ. the one with the DJ had better food.

But nothing about the affairs was the least bit torrid or shocking.

That's not the point. The point is that to us, it's a sacred ritual.

And we don't have to participate in farces that demean and marginalize it.

Then RSVP 'no'.

But you don't have the right to disrupt it.

And chances are, few people would attend your peculiar church that preaches hatred against strangers.

Er..they didn't disrupt it. They tried to opt out of participating. But dumbass wahoo queers want them to be FORCED to participate.

Participate how? As guests? Participate in the wedding ceremony? We're they asked to check out the gift registry? We're they expected to give away the bride? We're they in the reception line?

Nope. They were asked to make floral arraignments. That's not participation. It is, in fact , a florist's stock in trade, no matter how much paranoid hyperbole you want to ladle on.

They were asked to create floral arrangements (and place them) for a ceremony they believe is sacrilege.
They can't be compelled to do so. There's no law in the world that could compel them to do so. If there is, it's a bad law.

A bad law that helps eliminate discrimination? Okay, I'll play in your ballpark.

A sect of Christianity that preaches you must NOT love your neighbor as you would love yourself. That's a bad religion.

 

[Syriusly]

Segregationists and slave owners felt the same way.

They were just following the bible.

BOOM!! /thread.

The moment you or anyone else attacks my religion or belief in God you become a bigot.

bigot:
noun
1.
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

She can have her beliefs, but she can't break the law and have a defense for those beliefs.

Ex. Honor Killings.

If a father kills their daughter, he can believe that he was doing it for the "honor" of his family. However, he still broke the law because of the action of murder.

Back to the Florist:

If a Florist refuses to serve a gay couple because she doesn't believe that same-sex marriage is real, she can have that belief. She cannot do the action of discrimination towards a gay couple and use her beliefs as a defense. She still discriminated against them, that's against the law.

If we allowed religious exemptions for people breaking the law, we would have chaos and no law to guide society.

This is kind of funny.

If she doesn't think gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

If she thinks gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

Marriage is a sacrament to Christians. If homos are going to call their sacrilegious ceremonies *marriage* then we view it as a sacrament. Since they are defiling it, we view it as an abomination, and we're not going to participate.

Get over it. Call a gaker.

Umm... No. It's a right given by a secular state government. It might have begun as a religious ceremony but religion has NOTHING to do with the government extending a right to 2 individuals who want to be in a relationship together.

It Was Never About the Cake Deborah Munn

And that's what bigots like Sass will never truly understand. They are treating human beings as less than human because of who they love. It's wrong.

Again. The state doesn't dictate what constitutes *religion* and what doesn't. This is why we told you idiots to call it a union, not a marriage.

Because marriage is a sacrament, and as such, we are compelled to treat it as such.

Which means homo weddings are an abomination and we can't participate in them in any way, shape or form.

'We' meaning small minded bigots who call themselves Christians?

As opposed to the millions of Christians who have not trouble following the law and selling a cake to homosexuals.

 

[bodecea]

That's not the point. The point is that to us, it's a sacred ritual.

And we don't have to participate in farces that demean and marginalize it.

Then RSVP 'no'.

But you don't have the right to disrupt it.

And chances are, few people would attend your peculiar church that preaches hatred against strangers.

Er..they didn't disrupt it. They tried to opt out of participating. But dumbass wahoo queers want them to be FORCED to participate.

Participate how? As guests? Participate in the wedding ceremony? We're they asked to check out the gift registry? We're they expected to give away the bride? We're they in the reception line?

Nope. They were asked to make floral arraignments. That's not participation. It is, in fact , a florist's stock in trade, no matter how much paranoid hyperbole you want to ladle on.

They were asked to create floral arrangements (and place them) for a ceremony they believe is sacrilege.
They can't be compelled to do so. There's no law in the world that could compel them to do so. If there is, it's a bad law.

A bad law that helps eliminate discrimination? Okay, I'll play in your ballpark.

A sect of Christianity that preaches you must NOT love your neighbor as you would love yourself. That's a bad religion.

Now...that's just Crazy Talk!

 

[JFK_USA]

It might have begun as a religious ceremony but religion has NOTHING to do with the government extending a right to 2 individuals who want to be in a relationship together.

So, the government took a religious ceremony and secularized it. Perfect!!

Don't blame me, blame whoever made it law. Once they made it law, they are bound by the US constitution to provide equal treatment under the law.

I didn't blame you, did I? I'm pretty much certain now that government shouldn't have a place in marriage, this is pretty much the prime example. The government shouldn't define marriage. At all.

"The government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof."

So, when you make laws defining marriage, you are making laws in respect to the establishment of religion in America.

Then support public interest groups that support legal funds to fight the constitutionality of state-sanctioned marriages. I don't think you will win under the Free exercise clause but hey, you have the right to bring suit against anyone and make your case.

 

[bodecea]

It might have begun as a religious ceremony but religion has NOTHING to do with the government extending a right to 2 individuals who want to be in a relationship together.

So, the government took a religious ceremony and secularized it. Perfect!!

Don't blame me, blame whoever made it law. Once they made it law, they are bound by the US constitution to provide equal treatment under the law.

I didn't blame you, did I? I'm pretty much certain now that government shouldn't have a place in marriage, this is pretty much the prime example. The government shouldn't define marriage. At all.

"The government shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof."

So, when you make laws defining marriage, you are making laws in respect to the establishment of religion in America.

Then support public interest groups that support legal funds to fight the constitutionality of state-sanctioned marriages. I don't think you will win under the Free exercise clause but hey, you have the right to bring suit against anyone and make your case.

I'm sorry...but that would require actually DOING something.

 

[MaryL]

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

bigotry is sad. luckily it's dying out.

If only it would on the left side of the aisle also

example?

Example of what? Bigotry from the left? Start with religion.

what about it? there are far more religious bigots on the right than the left.

Bigotry isn't the issue here. Don't force "acceptance" on people that aren't hurting anyone if they reject homosexuality. They aren't stoning people to death or cutting off heads, they are just making a lifestyle choice. Who is this woman hurting anyway? Seems to me gays need to pick their battleground, not just bash people over the head all the time.

 

[Katzndogz]

BOOM!! /thread.

She can have her beliefs, but she can't break the law and have a defense for those beliefs.

Ex. Honor Killings.

If a father kills their daughter, he can believe that he was doing it for the "honor" of his family. However, he still broke the law because of the action of murder.

Back to the Florist:

If a Florist refuses to serve a gay couple because she doesn't believe that same-sex marriage is real, she can have that belief. She cannot do the action of discrimination towards a gay couple and use her beliefs as a defense. She still discriminated against them, that's against the law.

If we allowed religious exemptions for people breaking the law, we would have chaos and no law to guide society.

This is kind of funny.

If she doesn't think gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

If she thinks gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

Marriage is a sacrament to Christians. If homos are going to call their sacrilegious ceremonies *marriage* then we view it as a sacrament. Since they are defiling it, we view it as an abomination, and we're not going to participate.

Get over it. Call a gaker.

Umm... No. It's a right given by a secular state government. It might have begun as a religious ceremony but religion has NOTHING to do with the government extending a right to 2 individuals who want to be in a relationship together.

It Was Never About the Cake Deborah Munn

And that's what bigots like Sass will never truly understand. They are treating human beings as less than human because of who they love. It's wrong.

Again. The state doesn't dictate what constitutes *religion* and what doesn't. This is why we told you idiots to call it a union, not a marriage.

Because marriage is a sacrament, and as such, we are compelled to treat it as such.

Which means homo weddings are an abomination and we can't participate in them in any way, shape or form.

'We' meaning small minded bigots who call themselves Christians?

As opposed to the millions of Christians who have not trouble following the law and selling a cake to homosexuals.

Homosexuals were never denied a cake. They could have any cake in the display case.

 

[koshergrl]

That's not the point. The point is that to us, it's a sacred ritual.

And we don't have to participate in farces that demean and marginalize it.

Then RSVP 'no'.

But you don't have the right to disrupt it.

And chances are, few people would attend your peculiar church that preaches hatred against strangers.

Er..they didn't disrupt it. They tried to opt out of participating. But dumbass wahoo queers want them to be FORCED to participate.

Participate how? As guests? Participate in the wedding ceremony? We're they asked to check out the gift registry? We're they expected to give away the bride? We're they in the reception line?

Nope. They were asked to make floral arraignments. That's not participation. It is, in fact , a florist's stock in trade, no matter how much paranoid hyperbole you want to ladle on.

They were asked to create floral arrangements (and place them) for a ceremony they believe is sacrilege.
They can't be compelled to do so. There's no law in the world that could compel them to do so. If there is, it's a bad law.

A bad law that helps eliminate discrimination? Okay, I'll play in your ballpark.

A sect of Christianity that preaches you must NOT love your neighbor as you would love yourself. That's a bad religion.

It doesn't eliminate discrimination, it enables it.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

A Google search reveals they are Westboro...not Christians. Nice try though

Your Google is broken.

Westboro Baptist Church - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

My Google is fine, the pic is an image of Westboro and I don't consider them Christians. Stop getting your man briefs in a bunch

I don't wear underwear and your interest is creepy.

Baptist is Christian...just like you say you are.

I could slap the name plate from our BMW on a Chevy but that doesn't make the Chevy a BMW

And Ironically, they could say the same thing about you and all Catholics. Many Baptists do not consider Catholics Christians.

And Mormons don't consider either to be valid as they are not Christians. That's why religion is so ******* stupid. Large groups of little people shaking their fat little fists at each other proclaiming that everyone except themselves are going to hell.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

This is kind of funny.

If she doesn't think gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

If she thinks gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

Marriage is a sacrament to Christians. If homos are going to call their sacrilegious ceremonies *marriage* then we view it as a sacrament. Since they are defiling it, we view it as an abomination, and we're not going to participate.

Get over it. Call a gaker.

Umm... No. It's a right given by a secular state government. It might have begun as a religious ceremony but religion has NOTHING to do with the government extending a right to 2 individuals who want to be in a relationship together.

It Was Never About the Cake Deborah Munn

And that's what bigots like Sass will never truly understand. They are treating human beings as less than human because of who they love. It's wrong.

Again. The state doesn't dictate what constitutes *religion* and what doesn't. This is why we told you idiots to call it a union, not a marriage.

Because marriage is a sacrament, and as such, we are compelled to treat it as such.

Which means homo weddings are an abomination and we can't participate in them in any way, shape or form.

'We' meaning small minded bigots who call themselves Christians?

As opposed to the millions of Christians who have not trouble following the law and selling a cake to homosexuals.

Homosexuals were never denied a cake. They could have any cake in the display case.

Then, "..Let them eat cake." It's sad to see you all sucked into this troll's thread.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

The appeal will be made on religious and artistic freedom grounds.

Get over it and stop wasting taxpayer's money. Who gives a phlying phuck about a phlorist with a bug up her ass?

Plenty care

Because you like a good Christian victim.

Oh, noooooooo....She's good at PLAYING the victim, hiding behind this silly assed twit in Washington state who never got so much publicity until she stuck her little pointy heels in the sand and suddenly got religion when she needed it.

 

[Seawytch]

This is kind of funny.

If she doesn't think gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

If she thinks gay marriage is real, then she's got no reason to object to selling the flowers.

Marriage is a sacrament to Christians. If homos are going to call their sacrilegious ceremonies *marriage* then we view it as a sacrament. Since they are defiling it, we view it as an abomination, and we're not going to participate.

Get over it. Call a gaker.

Umm... No. It's a right given by a secular state government. It might have begun as a religious ceremony but religion has NOTHING to do with the government extending a right to 2 individuals who want to be in a relationship together.

It Was Never About the Cake Deborah Munn

And that's what bigots like Sass will never truly understand. They are treating human beings as less than human because of who they love. It's wrong.

Again. The state doesn't dictate what constitutes *religion* and what doesn't. This is why we told you idiots to call it a union, not a marriage.

Because marriage is a sacrament, and as such, we are compelled to treat it as such.

Which means homo weddings are an abomination and we can't participate in them in any way, shape or form.

'We' meaning small minded bigots who call themselves Christians?

As opposed to the millions of Christians who have not trouble following the law and selling a cake to homosexuals.

Homosexuals were never denied a cake. They could have any cake in the display case.

Can you point out where that was the case in the court proceedings? (Where the baker lost I might add)

 

[SwimExpert]

I didn't read your whole post.

Then there's nothing you can give in reply that can have any significance whatsoever.

 

[MaryL]

In a Muslim country with sharia law, gays would be stoned to death. Not denied service out of conscience, like we should grant in a free country. People use their coincidence to avoid service in the military, that same consideration should be applied to business too. The two ends of the magnet have to meet here. If you are a conscientious objector to war on religious or personal grounds, why no allow business to object to serving gays? Somewhere, here, there has to be a middle ground.

 

[Nosmo King]

Then RSVP 'no'.

But you don't have the right to disrupt it.

And chances are, few people would attend your peculiar church that preaches hatred against strangers.

Er..they didn't disrupt it. They tried to opt out of participating. But dumbass wahoo queers want them to be FORCED to participate.

Participate how? As guests? Participate in the wedding ceremony? We're they asked to check out the gift registry? We're they expected to give away the bride? We're they in the reception line?

Nope. They were asked to make floral arraignments. That's not participation. It is, in fact , a florist's stock in trade, no matter how much paranoid hyperbole you want to ladle on.

They were asked to create floral arrangements (and place them) for a ceremony they believe is sacrilege.
They can't be compelled to do so. There's no law in the world that could compel them to do so. If there is, it's a bad law.

A bad law that helps eliminate discrimination? Okay, I'll play in your ballpark.

A sect of Christianity that preaches you must NOT love your neighbor as you would love yourself. That's a bad religion.

It doesn't eliminate discrimination, it enables it.

What color is the sky I your world?

 

[koshergrl]

Er..they didn't disrupt it. They tried to opt out of participating. But dumbass wahoo queers want them to be FORCED to participate.

Participate how? As guests? Participate in the wedding ceremony? We're they asked to check out the gift registry? We're they expected to give away the bride? We're they in the reception line?

Nope. They were asked to make floral arraignments. That's not participation. It is, in fact , a florist's stock in trade, no matter how much paranoid hyperbole you want to ladle on.

They were asked to create floral arrangements (and place them) for a ceremony they believe is sacrilege.
They can't be compelled to do so. There's no law in the world that could compel them to do so. If there is, it's a bad law.

A bad law that helps eliminate discrimination? Okay, I'll play in your ballpark.

A sect of Christianity that preaches you must NOT love your neighbor as you would love yourself. That's a bad religion.

It doesn't eliminate discrimination, it enables it.

What color is the sky I your world?

The color of reality, and truth.

 

[koshergrl]

""The attorney general's targeting of Barronelle was unprecedented," Waggoner said. "He has had 18 months to end the threat to our client's freedom and livelihood. It is interesting that this offer only materialized after his crusade to ruin this 70-year-old grandmother was exposed nationally."

Florist Who Refused to Do Flowers for Gay Wedding to Appeal - ABC News