Florist Hit With 2 Lawsuits For Refusing To Serve Gay Couple

[jpeyton]

Because previously the flowers were not being used for a same-sex marriage.

But see, now you run into the pesky fact that same-sex marriage is considered equal to hetero-marriage in Washington state in the eyes of the law. You can't use your religion as an excuse to discriminate.

In the end, a $2000 fine from the state might not do much damage to the florist. But the risk of getting sued by the state AG and the ACLU is one very heavy deterrent for other business owners who might want to discriminate against a protected class in the future.

 

[soulcougher73]

2 straight men can have a same-sex wedding and therefore there is no discrimination based on sexual orientation.

She is discriminating against an event not a sexual orientation.

Wow. Talk about a delusional brain on display here lol. You gotta be out of straws to grasp at by now.

 

[OutHouse]

Wow. Talk about a delusional brain on display here lol. You gotta be out of straws to grasp at by now.

he is 100% correct.

 

[jpeyton]

he is 100% correct.

Then the florist has an open-and-shut case in court, nothing to worry about.

 

[soulcougher73]

Doesnt matter if this is in public space it is a PRIVATE BUSINESS.

First you need to understand there really is no such thing as a private business. Well maybe taking a dump is, but pretty much all businesses require the public to operate. You may own it, but its a public business subject to laws geared to the public.

You can play word games if you want but in reality this is what is going on everyday around the world.

 

[soulcougher73]

he is 100% correct.

So she has never served ANY wedding before? Sounds like her issue is with them being gay, not weddings.

Edit: It really doesnt matter what our opinions are. This is a slam dunk case that she is going to lose badly based on laws of that state.

 

[nehalem256]

So she has never served ANY wedding before? Sounds like her issue is with them being gay, not weddings.

Sounds to me like she has a problem with same-sex weddings. As straight people are allowed to have a same-sex marriage this has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

Edit: It really doesnt matter what our opinions are. This is a slam dunk case that she is going to lose badly based on lwas of that state.

So what you are saying is liberals are lying hypocrites. Legal same-sex marriage does affect straight people. And it is okay to force your beliefs on marriage onto others.

Then the florist has an open-and-shut case in court, nothing to worry about.

You mean except for the bullying by the AG to force liberal morality on her?

 

[jpeyton]

Sounds to me like she has a problem with same-sex weddings. As straight people are allowed to have a same-sex marriage this has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

I'm actually looking forward to this line of defense coming up in the courtroom. The laughing from the peanut gallery might invoke a short recess.

 

[nehalem256]

I'm actually looking forward to this line of defense coming up in the courtroom. The laughing from the peanut gallery might invoke a short recess.

Are you saying straight people cannot get a same-sex marriage? :hmm:

 

[Pens1566]

Wrong the difference is that in a same-sex wedding both people are of the same gender. There is no requirement for them to be gay*. Discrimination based on sexual orientation not found

*And in fact such a requirement would constitute discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

I'll go with reality over your splitting of hairs. Almost guaranteed the court will as well.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

Bigot is about to get pwned.

Jesus Christ! I didn't realize it was 1999 again! Woohoo!

Stupid terminology aside, I'm not sure why this person is labeled a bigot. They disagree with something... something that a lot of the country disagrees with and in many states is still illegal. OH NO!

 

[nehalem256]

I'll go with reality over your splitting of hairs. Almost guaranteed the court will as well.

And reality says that being gay is not a requirement for getting a same-sex marriage.

 

[nehalem256]

Jesus Christ! I didn't realize it was 1999 again! Woohoo!

Stupid terminology aside, I'm not sure why this person is labeled a bigot. They disagree with something... something that a lot of the country disagrees with and in many states is still illegal. OH NO!

For the same reason that the Washington AG is suing a florist that won't support a marriage they disagree with.

They want to bully people into supporting their morality.

Which is highly ironic as same-sex marriage supporters have been saying for years it is wrong to force your morality with regard to marriage onto others.

 

[soulcougher73]

So what you are saying is liberals are lying hypocrites. Legal same-sex marriage does affect straight people. And it is okay to force your beliefs on marriage onto others.

No. Religious Conservatives already hold the crown of lying hypocrites. They have since..well forever. We dont even keep track anymore. They are the reigning champs in that department.

You can believe whatever you want marriage to be about and others will do the same. If they want to include same sex marraige into their beliefs that is fine. If you dont, that is fine also. But in the eyes of the law there can be no discrimination on this. Thus they must be entitled to everything straight marriages get in the eyes of the law, no more, no less.

Now onto the business side of this argument. The store owner can personally believe and not agree with gay marriage, but as a public business she cannot discriiminate against same sex marriage in the eyes of the law regarding businesses. She has and is going to be punished for it.

And another point, which is what i would have done if it were me. I would have taken my business elsewhere that is happy to serve me and left this bigot to wallow in her self pity. But that is just me.

 

[soulcougher73]

Jesus Christ! I didn't realize it was 1999 again! Woohoo!

Stupid terminology aside, I'm not sure why this person is labeled a bigot. They disagree with something... something that a lot of the country disagrees with and in many states is still illegal. OH NO!

I was being silly, but 1999 rocked 😛

 

[nehalem256]

No. Religious Conservatives already hold the crown of lying hypocrites. They have since..well forever. We dont even keep track anymore. They are the reigning champs in that department.

You can believe whatever you want marriage to be about and others will do the same. If they want to include same sex marraige into their beliefs that is fine. If you dont, that is fine also. But in the eyes of the law there can be no discrimination on this. Thus they must be entitled to everything straight marriages get in the eyes of the law, no more, no less.

Now onto the business side of this argument. The store owner can personally believe and not agree with gay marriage, but as a public business she cannot discriiminate against same sex marriage in the eyes of the law regarding businesses. She has and is going to be punished for it.

And another point, which is what i would have done if it were me. I would have taken my business elsewhere that is happy to serve me and left this bigot to wallow in her self pity. But that is just me.

No she cannot discriminate against a sexual orientation (well so long as by sexual orientation we exclude a large number of sexual orientations). Same-sex marriage is not a sexual orientation. It is an event.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

No she cannot discriminate against a sexual orientation (well so long as by sexual orientation we exclude a large number of sexual orientations). Same-sex marriage is not a sexual orientation. It is an event.

Too bad she went on record saying she objected because she believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman. If she provides service to weddings she has to do all legally recognized weddings even using your strawman. She is either discriminating based on sexual orientation or gender lines. Either way it's a protected class and she will lose.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

No she cannot discriminate against a sexual orientation (well so long as by sexual orientation we exclude a large number of sexual orientations). Same-sex marriage is not a sexual orientation. It is an event.

But apparently, according to all of these liberals here, you cannot discriminate against an event either. Hmmmm... I wonder if they feel the same about Westboro baptist church. I wouldn't sell anything to them if given the option and I doubt anyone in here would fault me for that.

 

[etrigan420]

“As Attorney General, it is my job to enforce the laws of the state of Washington,” Ferguson said. “If a business provides a product or service to opposite-sex couples for their wedding, then it must provide same-sex couples the same product or service.”

If this is the law as written, then no amount of "Ahhh, but can hetero couples have a same-sex marriage?...and what about frogs? Can a man marry a frog? What if he just wants the frog to give him a BJ? Shouldn't a man be allowed to marry a frog? :hmm:" bullshit is going to hold up in court.

Thanks for the lulz though nehalem...I fear that one of these days your circular logic is going to cause your head to become firmly and permanently impacted into your asshole, but I'll enjoy the ride while it lasts.

And rest assured that we'll have a spirited debate as to whether or not a man can marry his own sphincter in your memory.

 

[bshole]

The law is nothing more than an attempt for lying hypocritical liberals to force their definition of marriage on people that disagree with them.

I don't know, is it ok for the florist to deny service to a black man marrying a white woman, to an asian man marrying a black girl? At one point the definition of marriage was confined to marriages of the same race. Fundamentalist Christians felt as strongly about mixed marriages 50 years ago as they do today about gay marriage.

Just curious, would it be legal for the florist to deny service to radical muslim groups? Lets say the muslim group wanted flowers for their America is the Great Satan rally at the Radisson. Would the florist be obligated by law to supply flowers if requested?

 

[Pens1566]

Are you saying straight people cannot get a same-sex marriage? :hmm:

No, they absolutely can. He's saying that they don't.

And reality says that being gay is not a requirement for getting a same-sex marriage.

Reality is not a shitty Adam Sandler movie. You've back pedaled into this ridiculous notion that heterosexuals are entering into SSM so you can defend this utterly indefensible legal position the florist is in. Pro-tip : no one in their right mind is going to assume that a couple entering into a SSM isn't homosexual. That's your fantasy.

 

[jpeyton]

Same-sex marriage is not a sexual orientation. It is an event.

Nope. Marriage is an event. The sexual orientation of the couple getting married is what the florist discriminated against.

 

[jpeyton]

Lets say the muslim group wanted flowers for their America is the Great Satan rally at the Radisson. Would the florist be obligated by law to supply flowers if requested?

No, because chances are the if the florist objected to a "Great Satan" rally held by Muslims, the florist would also equally object to a "Great Satan" rally held by Jews, Christians, African Americans, homosexuals, women, etc. In that example, the same rule applies for all protected classes: No Great Satan rallies.

In this case, the event in question is a wedding. The florist chose to service heterosexual couples, but chose not to service homosexual couples. That's why the florist will lose in court. A separate set of rules for protected classes can't be tolerated.

 

[xBiffx]

The sexual orientation of the couple getting married is what the florist discriminated against.

Have fun proving that when they were going to that florist for years.

 

[Pens1566]

Have fun proving that when they were going to that florist for years.

Even if that did matter (which legally it doesn't), have fun proving the florist new either well enough to know they were gay before the mention of the wedding.