A state judge has determined that the government can force a floral designer to do custom design work and provide wedding support services even if she has a religious conviction that marriage is between one man and one woman. Barronelle Stutzman was found guilty for referring her friend and long-time customer to another florist because the customer wanted her to design floral arrangements and provide services for a same-sex wedding. Barronelle’s referral ensured the customer received the services he wanted, but has been labeled “discrimination” under Washington law.
The court also ruled that both the state and the couple may collect damages and attorneys’ fees not only from the floral shop, but also from Stutzman personally.
The court said:
“On the evening of November 5, 2012, there was no conflict … The following evening, after the … enactment of same-sex marriage, there would eventually be a direct and insoluble conflict between Stutzman’s religiously motivated conduct and the laws of the State of Washington. Stutzman cannot comply with both the law and her faith if she continues to provide flowers for weddings as part of her duly-licensed business, Arlene’s Flowers.”
…“The message of these rulings is unmistakable: the government will bring about your personal and professional ruin if you don’t help celebrate same-sex marriage,” said Ms. Waggoner, who represents the florist, in a statement.
Ms. Stutzman was sued by the state of Washington and two men who had asked her in March 2013 to prepare flowers for their wedding, several months after the state approved gay marriage in 2012. One of the men, Robert Ingersoll, had been a customer of Arlene’s Flowers for nearly a decade.
Ms. Stutzman, who had served gay customers over the years, declined to create the custom floral arrangements for the wedding but referred the men to several other local florists.
“The two men had no problem getting the flowers they wanted. They received several offers for free flowers, and the marketplace gives them plenty of options,” Ms. Waggoner said. “Laws that are supposed to prohibit discrimination might sound good, but the government has begun to use these laws to hurt people – to force them to conform and to silence and punish them if they don’t violate their religious beliefs on marriage.”
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson praised the judge’s ruling Wednesday, saying, “The law is clear: If you choose to provide a service to couples of the opposite sex, you must provide the same service to same-sex couples.”…
[….]
“America would be a better place if citizens respected each others’ differences and the government still protected the freedom to have those differences,” said Ms. Stutzman. “Instead, the government is coming after me and everything I have just because I won’t live my life the way the state says I should.”
You will go to jail for not accepting government gay marriage, says WA State Democrat AG. From the SeattleTimes, State sues florist over refusing service for gay wedding:
The state attorney general has filed a lawsuit in Benton County Superior Court against a Richland florist who refused to provide flowers for the wedding of longtime gay customers, citing her religious opposition to same-sex marriage. The state’s suit against Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene’s Flowers and Gifts, came just days after the Attorney General’s Office wrote to ask that Stutzman reconsider her position and agree to comply with the state’s anti-discrimination laws.
“Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers on the basis of sexual orientation,” Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a statement. “If a business provides a product or service to opposite-sex couples for their weddings, then it must provide same-sex couples the same product or service.”
A civil rights icon who gave the benediction at President Obama’s inauguration said that he believed ‘all white people were going to hell’.
The Reverend Joseph Lowery, 91, was speaking at a rally in Georgia.
According to an account in the Monroe County Reporter: ‘Lowery said that when he was a young militant, he used to say all white folks were going to hell.
‘Then he mellowed and just said most of them were. Now, he said, he is back to where he was.’
The point is, if one is a hate crime? Why isn’t the other considered such? In other words, President Obama shouldn’t have awarded the top civilian medal to a racist… unless Obama is a racist?
Interesting FB questions/comments and input on this story:
One friend writes:
If this florist is not a “Religious institution or business” it should allow its services without discrimination toward its buyers or customers, as well as employees who may be homosexual. I dont think this is Gay Marriage Tyranny, we all have opinions and we all have facts, hopefully, to build our opinions off of, but being a public service, or public business, they cannot discriminate on race, color, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, against hippies, or police officers, or punk rockers, or business men, or whatever.
Only in the event that they cause the business harm, can the business owner, or manager refuse service. Its kind of the same thing with Adoption agencies. These are public businesses, not so much religious institutions. It is the owners rights to close down or move its business if it doesn’t want to comply with the laws, but it is not necessarily their right to refuse service because they don’t believe its right or wrong. Remember the Chik Fila thing. They can believe what they want, but it doesn’t stop them from serving people food, regardless of their beliefs.
I know the attacks on the Institutions are coming and I hope you know Sean that I agree with you on the Christian Stance in all things. We can come up with non-faithful reasons to argue our points as well but #1 is that God is first among all things. If God is really first to this florist, then she should understand that selling flowers to someone is not condoning their behavior or their sexual orientation, its simply providing a service in which someone is paying for something. If she didn’t know they were Gay, she would have sold them flowers irregardless and this wouldn’t be a sin.
The only other option for this florist is to Close down shop. IF she really feels so strongly about it being a sin and that providing flowers for this couple would make God mad or upset with her, and the owner really loves God, then putting Him first means closing up shop. In her mind of course.
What do you think Sean?
Another friend:
What ever happened to “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”?
The first friend responds:
It doesn’t give the owners the right to Really refuse ANYONE. For example they can’t refuse you service because your wearing a blue shirt, or a hat. It can’t be some arbitrary reason. Maybe if your being offensive, or wearing something offensive, overly having a Public Display of Affection.
I respond:
Economics 101
Link through picture as well, to the section EVERYONE should read… click “Victicrats Should Take Economics 101”
I am very busy this last week-and-a-half leading up to my cruise… so I will quickley say that yes, if homosexuality were immutable, like skin color [ethnicity], I would say you would have a point. But if a person wants to not serve someone who doesn’t have shoes on, who skins animals, or prefers to catch instead of pitch… they have the prerogative to do so. Let the free market work, see the section “Victicrats Should Take Economics 101” http://tinyurl.com/ck4vcck
My wife’s family member gives her input:
I am a professional vocalist and I sing for numerous weddings. I would not sing for a same sex ceremony. I have refused to sing for weddings that I did not support – even though they were a man and woman. Does this mean that now I could be sued for refusing to take the job if offered by a gay couple? A marriage is more than just a ceremony to me. It truly is a Faith issue for me. I find it hard to believe that if I (or a florist) choose to refrain from extending my talents and abilities for hire to someone that I do not support in their marital decision than I lose MY rights. This is CRAZY and out of CONTROL. I am sure there are plenty of gay florists out there – They would probably appreciate the business.
I chime in:
Great point, would a person lose his or her right to not provide a service to a couple who didn’t get per-marital counseling from a pastor? Are they disenfranchised? Or can they simply take their business elsewhere? They should simply take their business elsewhere. That is what the free-market is for.
For the record, I would have provided the flowers, seeing that it would have been a great opportunity to befriend and witness to a lost world.
