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

well if you come in wearing skin tight leather pants , a fluffy sweater and carrying a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty little dog , yes. Otherwise, no. UNLESS of course you make a big deal of it.

Funny thing, my kids' godfather is gay and he's Mr Alpha Male, no one would ever know he's gay unless he told them. He's never been discriminated against or called slurs or any other thing b/c of his sexuality.

I have no earthly idea why some have to go out of their way to make others aware of their sexuality.

 

Now you're jumping into governmental discrimination which is a different kettle of fish, and something I would oppose.

And yes, ALL utilities are public utilities, completely regulated by the government as to who they must service and at what rates.

 

I find you too lacking in civility and logic to bother with further.

 

See, you can't even backup your BS. Don't worry, it wasn't a surprise.

Try to think this through. If race is equal to preference then its a civil right. Civil right legislation protects race and gender. Its amazing this has to be spoonfed to you.

 

That's right. Run away. It was expected you couldn't defend your argument.

 

Actually that is NOT the case. Some guy equating the two on a message board doesn't change the law. Do you know how a bill becomes law?

Words have meanings. Homosexuality is not a protected class. Not unless a law is enacted making them such. Or I guess if a law is passed defining homosexual as a gender or a race.

It's amazing that you lecture others that they need to think.

Under current law, homosexual is NOT a protected class and therefor any laws do not pertain to them, and thus there is no need to argue about the nature of homosexuality.

 

See. Uncivil. One of my cogent, well-written replies would be much better than you deserve, and completely wasted on you in any case--you'd just mock and insult.

I mean, just what could possibly be my motivation for chatting with you?

 

Maybe this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_people_and_Mormonism

If you went to a Religious Hindu Conference or event or celebration in the USA, you would see LOTS of white people, myself included at one time.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/..._is_america_ready_for_a_hindu_sweetheart.html

 

Don't worry, it wasn't expected you could defend yourself. Go ahead and keep crying about civility if that helps with the embarrassment.

 

HAHAHAHAHA A website anyone can edit. Dave, thats pretty noobish of you and you couldn't even point to a single example in recent history.

Are you really so blind you think all Mormons are white?

Wrong again Dave

http://www.blacklds.org/

Whoops! Down goes Frazier!

 

"Supreme Court Declares Gays a Protected Class"

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/supreme-court-declares-gays-a-protected-class/

"the five justices in the majority have made sexual orientation a full-fledged protected class under the 5th (and presumably 14th) Amendment. That is indeed truly historic."



"Gays Now a Protected Class under New Law"

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2009/October/Gays-Now-a-Protected-Class-of-People-under-New-Law/

"WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama has signed legislation that elevates homosexuals to the class of citizens that enjoy special protections under the law."

.

 

You expectation, unsurprisingly, is incorrect, I could of course defend my points very effectively indeed. But you're right, I am embarrassed. I'm embarrassed to be seen talking to you. So there will not be one more word of it.

 

Exactly why I wasn't using gay as the only example. If people are free to discriminate at will, they will, and those who wish it was that way, might end up on the hate list themselves, and I am sure they not be amused when it is them being discriminated against.

 

No there are privately owned utilities, like water etc.. that may be regulated, but what business isn't. If only the race, color, sex is all that is at play why wouldn't the government be able to discriminate? Why not?

 

Just like back in the "Good Old Days"

[video=youtube;e4ptm6F2KHQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4ptm6F2KHQ[/video]

 

Yes yes many people have used the "I'm so smart I wont respond" argument when they can't back up their claims. If you thought that was a new tactic you are quite mistaken. Pretty amusing for someone talking about being offended while sporting a racist avatar.

Keep on running little buddy.

 

Not at all! But you should have read that patronizing, desperate-forANY-example-of-positive-LDS-behavior-towards-blacks web page.

The LDS has recruited HUGE numbers of new tithe-paying, underwear-buying members in Africa, a massive missionary push that started pretty "coincidentally" with the "revelation" that blacks really were not "the spawn of Satan" after all. Anyone in the real world would need to conclude the church elders added up the BILLIONS of dollars that could come from even the impoverished African nations, and concluded maybe God didn't dislike the "backward black race" so much after all! Especially when any new black LDS church officials would be 5000 miles away from the main Tabernacle!

The Mormon church in the USA is a sea of white faces. Blacks in Salt Lake City are very rare. I just drove through much of Utah and it is definitely a white bread world! Another "coincidence" because we can be SURE that all the Mormons in Utah, all of whom grew up being taught by "GOD" that blacks were "subhuman", are going to IMMEDIATELY accept blacks intoo the bosom of their companies and social circles!

Mormons are the same to blacks as they are to homosexuals - they are extremely polite to their face, while spending MILLIONS of church dollars to keep the "sacred circle" of "pure Mormons" pure and in power.

 

LOL!!! First it was they have no blacks and now that has been proven to be an embarrassing lie now its all the blacks they have are token.

Yup, thats a liberal post!

 

Oh it will get there. At some point, Priests, Rabbi's, and Ministers will be forced to perform gay marriage ceremonies. Just give it time.

 

that is the scary part because that' s where it's heading. Liberty died in Nov 2008

 

You're projecting!

 

No, that's not true. You are projecting or you are lying.

 

What if you were a black flower shop owner and Aryan Nation came in and wanted you to decorate their "put blacks in their place" ball room dance. They have the freedom and the RIGHT to express opinions pertaining to race---do you---as a black business owner--- have to decorate the room?

That is more relevant to the actual scenerio. The shop keeper is chooosing not to do business with the event---not the person.

 

I read the original complaint. It states that the State of Washington has a law that explicitly prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sexual preference, and that Stutzman (owner of Arlene's Flowers) broke that law. It would seem that initially, the ruling MUST go against her, since she broke the law and admits breaking the law. She claims the law violates her religious freedom. But the initial legal proceeding only addresses whether she broke the law, and not whether the law itself is valid.

I notice that the hearing took place about a month ago, with the judge promising to rule in about a week. But I can't find anything more recent than that. Does anyone have anything?

 

She probably very nicely ran afoul of the interstate commerce clause. She's going to go to court and have the Constitution read back to her. This wedding stuff is so stupid. All you have to say is we are too busy that month and can't provide flowers. Not hard. If she really knew anything about the Constitution she could have handled this in about ten seconds.