WA florist who is being sued by the state for her religion files countersuit

The owner of Arlene's flowers is not accepting the nonsense from the state of WA. For those who do not recall, the florist refused to provide flowers for a homosexual wedding citing her religious beliefs. Rather than simply going down the street to another florist the gay guys decided that their lifestyle choice is more important than respecting her religion. Well, she has filed a counter-suit against the state citing the US Constitution. This is going to get interesting. This will show us whether or not homosexuals are to be treated as a special protected class or whether the US Constitution trumps even the feelings of homosexuals

interesting read

http://www.adfmedia.org/files/ArlenesFlowersCountersuit.pdf

 

With the exception of one word, you have it correct. This will show us whether homosexuals are to be treated as ordinary citizens, or whether the Constitution denies them the same rights and privileges as heterosexuals.

Once again, even the veriest dunce can see that homosexuals are not asking for any privilege not enjoyed by the vast majority of citizens. They are asking for equal treatment.

I'm always astounded when the local bigots consider legal equality to be "special privilege", and SOME of the equals are a "protected class" while all the others are not.

 

freedom of religion trumps what you do with your willy

 

Well, I guess we'll see whether religious freedom trumps constitutional rights, or legal equality.

If this reaches the Supreme Court, I bet both of us can predict exactly how each Justice will vote, and we don't even need to know either the facts or the law to be spot-on accurate.

 

Sec, if you walked into a diner, sat down to get some lunch, and the guy acted like you didn't exist, you'd feel a little put out, would you not? It's the same thing.

Would you feel better if it turned out the guy had a sincere religious conviction that said you can't feed guys named 'sec?'

 

If the florist succeeds, it will be on technicalities, not a finding that her religious or free speech rights have been violated.

 

Wow, you can't even ignore the leftists. They will force you to pay attention to them. It's not enough to tolerate them, you have to actually love big brother.

 

Or to be accurate for a change, if you offer a product for sale and a customer attempts to buy it, you need a very good reason for refusing to sell it. "We don't serve those folks" isn't a good enough reason.

 

If the Florists win this this case does that mean Mormons can refuse their business to black people because of their religious beliefs?

 

Just curious:

Where in the Bible does it say "Thou shalt not sell flowers to gays"?

 

Gay marriage has only been legal in Washington State for just a few months; not even a year. So if the business had never offered services for gay weddings, does the legalization of gay weddings suddenly force businesses that had never provided services for that before suddenly become required to?

 

Nope. Just deliver the flowers, and skip the melodrama, thanks.

 

Let's change this around a little. What if the shop owner was a member of the Aryan Nations and refused to sell flowers to an African-American couple. What if the shop owner was Muslim and he refused to sell flowers to a Jewish couple? What if the shop owner was a Wiccan and refused to sell flowers to a Christian couple?

Personally, I wouldn't have sued. I would have used my First Amendment rights to tell everybody I could (and with the Internet, that is a lot of bodies) what bigots the owners of Arlene's Flowers of Benton County WA are and to never shop from them. You know, let the free market take care of it for me.

 

I think you miss the point. "Mah religion don't let me serve no inferior races" doesn't work under any circumstances.

Presumably, this florist has been serving gay customers for quite a while, whether knowingly or not. Gays, after all, do get hospitalized, and they die. They buy flowers.

So the general principle stands: IF you advertise a business that provides a product to the public, and some member of the public attempts to purchase your product, you probably can't yank it back and say "nope, not you, I don't like your (whatever)". In other words, you are required to honor your business representations. What the customer proposes to DO with your product is irrelevant. You advertise it, you sell it.

 

This is somewhat harder in practice, especially if a majority of the citizens think denying service to you is a wonderful act of religious devotion on the part of the florist.

It was no secret here in Alabama in the 60s, that lunch counters wouldn't serve blacks. Lunch counter owners weren't boycotted for this, they were admired, respected, and patronized. They were heroes. The free market is wonderful if you're in the large majority. It rewards bigotry in practice, in law, in every way the majority can impose.

Consider this very forum. The bigots are in the majority, and they stroke each other silly."I don't serve minorities we all love to hate" would earn them loyal business!

 

Yeah, you're right. I forget that conservatives are not the greedy capitalists they want us to think they are. A true capitalist would sell to anyone and everyone, as long as they were making a profit from it. Here in California, some of the biggest supporters of the SCOTUS decision were businesses that are involved in weddings. They are seeing a huge windfall from all the gay couples getting married.

 

please stop insulting blacks by trying to draw comparison between race and where 2 guys stick their willy. Now, if you drew a comparison to smokers vs non smokers then that would be accurate.

- - - Updated - - -

you are almost correct but have the words flipped. The Constitution specifically discusses RELIGION but nowhere does it discuss your johnson and what you do with it.

I await to see if the courts rule that gay sex trumps the Constitution

 

You gettin' paid to stick that bit about someone putting their johnson somewhere into every message today?

I hope so. If you're really so obsessed you might have something of a problem.

 

I'd be willing to bet they buy considerably more flowers that your typical conservative white male who maybe buys some once a year if they're in trouble, bad business move.

 

Of course this is wrong. Government should get out of marriage - let the states/people handle it. At the same time, this woman has a right to refuse trade to anyone she likes, for any reason, because she has a property right over her capital - a right to exclusive use.

 

What is .particularly funny is this bakery certainly sells cakes to a variety of specifically Bible-banned weddings, like second marriages (bigamy and the woman is certainly not a "virgin" - which the Bible demands a death sentence, maybe she poisons their cakes?), weddings that serve pork and/or shellfish, weddings involving mixed religions, weddings on a Sunday or Saturday (whatever her religion might say), weddings where the wife or husband have had sterilization, and any of a dozen other Biblical principles she entirely ignores.

Heck, I bet this proprietress often wears clothes of mixed fabrics, and may even drink milk! And she DEFINITELY supplies "graven images" on the tops of her cakes!

Burn, baby, burn!

 

Of course, the defendant had built a lot of her business specificly on serving the gay community, then she pulled the rug out from under a steady customer. Did any of the other florists in town give him the same treatment? Did her sudden attitude problem cause him irremediable distress? These are important and pertinent questions.

 

She has the right to refuse service to ANY CUSTOMER, as long as it is NOT for their race, faith, or ethnicity.

Homosexuals enjoy NO SUCH MENTION in the Constitution.

If you want them to, get an Amendment passed.

 

so what you are saying is the Constitution mentions religion but does not discuss what you do with your johnson

 

In other words: 'Here's my meme again! Read another repetition of my meme!'

$$$