If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Stranger)   Washington state has filed a lawsuit against the florist who refused to do the flowers for a gay wedding due to her "relationship with Jesus". WWJD, indeed?   (slog.thestranger.com) divider line 273
    More: Followup, public accommodations, flower shops, Human Rights Commission, legal defense, discrimination law, federal courts  
•       •       •

4418 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Apr 2013 at 11:28 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



273 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-10 12:36:52 PM
teenage mutant ninja rapist: So what. I mean really bigots are everywhere. This woman doesnt want a customer for whatever reason than so what.
what are you gonna do put a gun to her and make her do some flowers.


No.  Sue her and drive her out of business.  "I don't like gay people" is not a legitimate, and in this case an explicitly <i>illegal</i>, reason to not want a certain customer.


Im sure lots of other florists would like to take the couples business.

you americans and your lawyers sheesh. It would be comical if it wasnt so sad. Most other places the proper response would be "well fark you to buddy" and that would be the end of it


I'm not American, dude.  And the point isn't that there are other florists.  It's that THIS florist should either stop being a bigot, or shouldn't be in business at all.  If that takes a lawsuit, so be it.
 
2013-04-10 12:37:38 PM
With the florist's lawyers apparently itching for a fight, the case seems poised to reach the state supreme court, or even federal courts, as a test of conservative legal defenses in the name of religious liberty and moral conscience.

Translation:  Someone else is footing her legal bills.
 
2013-04-10 12:38:45 PM

Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.

You can't stop them, true, and neither can I.  But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off.  The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that.  You're being an asshole.  Quit it."

I'm glad you read and responded. Waited all day for it. ;)  I truly wasn't trolling you, you know. You've been here long enough that you're noticed and appreciated.

I'm still not convinced the AG has any ground to tell anyone what sort of customers they want to do business with. If some ass doesn't like a particular person, they don't have to do business with them. The customer isn't obligated in any way to give said ass money. They (the asshole) don't have to "quit it" because someone got their feelings hurt. Yes, that is a slippery slope...where do you draw the line? I'm of the mind we have too many folks worrying about too many things as it is and not enough just actual responsibility. But, I'm old and cranky, so there you go. Have a great day!


Slippery slope, indeed.  Looking forward to people getting sued by the State because they refused to strip and bend over for some gay guy who liked cut of their butt.
 
2013-04-10 12:39:17 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: jshine: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Not sure what the laws in WA are, but some factors (usually including color and religion) are legally proscribed as a basis of discrimination. Often sexual preference is not, though again, I'm not sure about WA.

It's against the law in WA.  IMHO, she deserves public shaming AND a lawsuit.


If that's true then yes, she's definitely calling this down on herself. The only defense I can imagine at this point would be something along the lines of "i don't mind that they are gay & I sell flowers to gay people all the time, but forcing me to enable gay marriage violates my 1st amendment freedom of religion protections" - but that seems like a real stretch.
 
2013-04-10 12:39:22 PM

Man On Pink Corner: But it's perfectly OK for Washington state-licensed pharmacists to use their Bibles as medical textbooks, amiright?

Makes no sense at all.


Hopefully this case will set a precedent for those slackers.

/seriously, don't take on a career if you know your religion will prevent you from performing basic functions
 
2013-04-10 12:39:53 PM
Jesus: What? I've had no relations with that woman. She's just fooling herself.
 
2013-04-10 12:41:13 PM

Gulper Eel: Benevolent Misanthrope: But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off. The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that. You're being an asshole. Quit it."

The People are able to see it as they choose without the state doing it for them. We don't have a situation here where gay couples are charged $2000 but straight couples get to pay $600 for the same flowers, and state would have a logical reason to step in. There are plenty of competing florists who would be delighted to take the gay couple's business. So what we have is a florist who's lost at the very least an employee two customers, and no doubt plenty more since she's earned herself a shiatload of bad press. Looks like the problem will solve itself without the state needing to ride to the rescue.

One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?


Excellent point, but that would probably be considered a failure to enable "hate speech" and would therefore be totally OK.
 
2013-04-10 12:45:10 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: I'm still not convinced the AG has any ground to tell anyone what sort of customers they want to do business with. If some ass doesn't like a particular person, they don't have to do business with them. The customer isn't obligated in any way to give said ass money. They (the asshole) don't have to "quit it" because someone got their feelings hurt. Yes, that is a slippery slope...where do you draw the line? I'm of the mind we have too many folks worrying about too many things as it is and not enough just actual responsibility. But, I'm old and cranky, so there you go. Have a great day!

Thanks for your kind words. :)

As a gay person, I see it more as a "sitting at the whites only lunch counter" thing, but that's probably because I've been the recipient of legalized anti-gay harassment for a very long time.   Any business person has a right to deny service, but when you deny service because someone is part of a class of persons that the law (passed by The People) says, "Knock off treating these people differently", then we have a problem.

Gulper Eel: One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?

If I did tell them to piss up a rope because they're KoC, and there was a law specifically saying I can't deny them service for being KoC, then I would expect to be sued and have a civil rights violation slapped on me for good measure.  If, however, I denied them service for asking me to print legally-defined hate speech, I'm protected.  When I deny them because I don't like their opinion, that's when the waters get muddy.


Look at it this way:  The gay couple came to her to do flowers.  They were denied because they're gay, not because the florist didn't like their colors or choice of plant species.  There's a law that says you can't do that - nor can she deny someone because they're Freewill Four-Square Gospel Baptist and she's Freewill Four-Square Primitive Baptist, or because they're a Seekrit Ae-rabb Mooslim, or because they're black.

It may seem a subtle difference, but for people like me who have been denied service time and again for just being who we are, and treated as third-class humans (or not EVEN human) by people around us and by the law, for a long time, it's a real difference.


>>>>people like me who have been denied service time and again for just being ....

... total douchbags?

.... morons?

What. Ever.
 
2013-04-10 12:48:03 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Gulper Eel: Benevolent Misanthrope: But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off. The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that. You're being an asshole. Quit it."

The People are able to see it as they choose without the state doing it for them. We don't have a situation here where gay couples are charged $2000 but straight couples get to pay $600 for the same flowers, and state would have a logical reason to step in. There are plenty of competing florists who would be delighted to take the gay couple's business. So what we have is a florist who's lost at the very least an employee two customers, and no doubt plenty more since she's earned herself a shiatload of bad press. Looks like the problem will solve itself without the state needing to ride to the rescue.

One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?

Excellent point, but that would probably be considered a failure to enable "hate speech" and would therefore be totally OK.


In high school I worked at a film developing store in the local mall, and our only 'red-line' was child porn. For that we'd call the cops (though the situation never occurred). Otherwise we'd be happy to print your gay porn or Klan-rally photos. We didn't judge anyone by the content of their print order, just by the thickness of their wallet.
 
2013-04-10 12:50:36 PM
Submitter here...

Some background on the story: Here, in Tri Cities, these two men in a long-term relationship had bought flowers from Arlene's for years. Suddenly, when it's legal for the two men to be married here, they come in to ask their long-time florist to do the flowers for their wedding. She says she will not do it because of her "personal relationship with Jesus". Apparently Jesus told her men should not marry each other, I guess. The guys were sad and disappointed, and left, presumably to talk to other florists. One of the men mentioned it on Facebook, the press got wind of it, and stuff blew up down here. One of her employees quit over it, as well. She's still got a sign up looking for a new flower arranger as of last time I drove by. The men who were discriminated against are not pursuing this, our AG is using it as a test case. The AG did offer the florist a chance to sign something saying that she wouldn't break the law again, she has refused, and the lawyers are taking over.

Interesting fact: Sexual orientation has been a protected class for the purpose of defining discrimination since 2006.
 
2013-04-10 12:50:37 PM
What she should have done is accepted the contract, then delivered totally farked up and wilted arrangements to the wedding, then said, oh, sorry, here's your money back.

This whole deal is stupid and dangerous... for the protected douchbag class. Say someone is a bigoted surgeon and refuse to do a sex-change operation on you. Do you REALLY want this guy to be FORCED by the State to perform the operation? Really?

People are stupid. Including gays.
 
2013-04-10 12:51:58 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: What she should have done is accepted the contract, then delivered totally farked up and wilted arrangements to the wedding, then said, oh, sorry, here's your money back.

This whole deal is stupid and dangerous... for the protected douchbag class. Say someone is a bigoted surgeon and refuse to do a sex-change operation on you. Do you REALLY want this guy to be FORCED by the State to perform the operation? Really?

People are stupid. Including gays.


Waiting patiently for some whiny moron to complain to Fark Mods about my hate speech.

Hey, go fark yourselves.
 
2013-04-10 12:52:25 PM

Spad31: Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.


Or..... You can contact a lawyer and and take them to court for their discriminatory policies just like the law allows. Now you tell me why an individual would willingly suffer this type of bigotry when the law (notice I used that word again) says you don't have to. Jesus you are a dunce, do you really think things work as you described? I got news for you there are I'm going to go ahead and say thousands of individuals and organizations in this country who have coughed up heavy settlements to women and ethnic minorities against whom they discriminated against. If same sex marriage is made legal LBGTs will protected in the same way.
 
2013-04-10 12:53:15 PM
Just Another OC Homeless Guy:

jesus christ you're needy today

/you should get a cat or something
 
2013-04-10 12:53:19 PM
Interesting fact: Sexual orientation has been a protected class in Washington State for the purpose of defining discrimination since 2006.Guess I should use that preview button every so often...
 
2013-04-10 12:55:26 PM
So she admits to having a relationship with an unmarried man?
 
2013-04-10 12:59:27 PM

show me: Well, how about this then: Since the Religious Right consider homosexuality to be a mental illness which can be cured, I think this would fall under the ADA, discriminating against someone with a disability.


I like this.
 
2013-04-10 01:02:07 PM

aspAddict: Would the AG sue a Muslim shop owner who refused to do business with someone wearing an "I LOVE BACON" shirt, or would the pork-eater be labelled as "insensitive" for having the NERVE to set foot in the Muslim shop?


Or, would the AG sue a bar owner if some dude is prevented from renting a corner of a gay bar for a 'private party' -- which happens to be a loud anti-gay sermon and scripture meeting, with beer?
 
2013-04-10 01:03:33 PM
Oh - and in answer to all you free-market-solution Farkers...  I am so there with you.  We queers have more disposable income than anyone else, statistically speaking.  And we're far more likely to patronize businesses who make it clear they don't hate us on principle.  It's smart business to market to us and take our money.

But IMHO, this woman deserves the lost gay income, public shaming, a lawsuit (for, you know, breaking the law), and a gay critique of her work.  That'll learn her.
 
2013-04-10 01:05:36 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Benevolent Misanthrope:

>>>>people like me who have been denied service time and again for just being ....

... total douchbags?

.... morons?

What. Ever.


Get a job.
 
2013-04-10 01:05:39 PM
I don't understand what's going on here.  She's banging the guy who waters the plants in the greenhouse, therefore she can't deliver flowers to a gay wedding?  What, did they roll on the order or something?  Crush all the begonias that were earmarked for that wedding?

/not my best work, gotta be in the lab in 26 seconds
 
2013-04-10 01:09:22 PM

This text is now purple: Wait, let me get this right: you mean to tell me there are straight florists?



www.mediabistro.com

What a straight florist might look like.
 
2013-04-10 01:11:17 PM
If Washington lists gays as a protected class, then I most certainly don't have a problem with this.

There are plenty of people (assholes, adulterers, and porn-hounds mostly) who I would rather not do business with, and many of them, yes, offend me deeply by their actions. But as long as they're not too needy and don't irritate other customers, I'll take they're money.
 
2013-04-10 01:13:45 PM
The My Little Pony Killer: The residents of Washington State disagree with you, as our laws (you know, the entire reason the AG is involved in the first place?) state that people CANNOT deny business based on their personal feelings.

Then the laws should be changed.

Let's go the other way: could a florist refuse to provide floral service for a wedding at the Westboro Baptist Church? SHOULD they be allowed to refuse? If WBC wanted to hire any one of us for something, how would we respond?
 
2013-04-10 01:16:40 PM

TheOtherMisterP: The My Little Pony Killer: The residents of Washington State disagree with you, as our laws (you know, the entire reason the AG is involved in the first place?) state that people CANNOT deny business based on their personal feelings.

Then the laws should be changed.

Let's go the other way: could a florist refuse to provide floral service for a wedding at the Westboro Baptist Church? SHOULD they be allowed to refuse? If WBC wanted to hire any one of us for something, how would we respond?


"Seat's taken."
 
2013-04-10 01:20:54 PM
TheOtherMisterP:
Let's go the other way: could a florist refuse to provide floral service for a wedding at the Westboro Baptist Church? SHOULD they be allowed to refuse? If WBC wanted to hire any one of us for something, how would we respond?

you cannot deny someone service based on their religion. full stop. Historically this kind of discrimination has caused far more problems than your being uncomfortable with having to deal with someone you disagree with.
 
2013-04-10 01:22:13 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Benevolent Misanthrope: >>>>people like me who have been denied service time and again for just being ....

... total douchbags?

.... morons?

What. Ever.

Get a job.


Sorry, I'd much rather sit on my ass, collect UI (thanks for your involuntary contributions!) and laugh at you.
 
2013-04-10 01:22:45 PM
Not a protected class, see you in the supreme court.  If it makes it that far.
 
2013-04-10 01:28:28 PM

IRQ12: Not a protected class, see you in the supreme court.  If it makes it that far.


Protected class in WA.  STFU.
 
2013-04-10 01:28:37 PM

Voiceofreason01: TheOtherMisterP:
you cannot deny someone service based on their religion. full stop. Historically this kind of discrimination has caused far more problems than your being uncomfortable with having to deal with someone you disagree with.


I definitely understand that the laws prohibit us from discriminating against people. But while many people are quick to bash on the florist, I'm trying to show that it can be a bit of a grey area. It's a cheap argument on my part to bring in Westboro Baptist Church, but I think it's still valid. If I want to send a big "F You" to WBC by refusing to work for them, then I have to allow the florist to do the same.
 
2013-04-10 01:33:50 PM

Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?

So you would be cool with a business owner refusing to serve someone because they were black?  Really?   Okay, now I know for sure you're trolling.  Got me.

No, of course I'm not trolling. If some shopkeeper is being an asshat, just take your money somewhere else.


In the US you get to take your money somewhere else AND sue them.
 
2013-04-10 01:37:38 PM

Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Gays aren't anything special. A business person not wanting to do business with someone because of their beliefs happens all the time. Why would anyone give a shiat?

Substitute "Jews" or "Blacks" for gays.

Uh, okay. Blacks or Jews aren't special. Just go spend your money somewhere else. Easy. Again, why would anyone give a shiat?

So you would be cool with a business owner refusing to serve someone because they were black?  Really?   Okay, now I know for sure you're trolling.  Got me.

No, of course I'm not trolling. If some shopkeeper is being an asshat, just take your money somewhere else.


Good on ya!  Just bend over and take it like a good boy...
 
2013-04-10 01:38:10 PM

Gulper Eel: If she wants to put herself out of business by sticking to her Christian beliefs, that's her choice. I'm sure her gay-friendly competition is cool with it too...


I live near where this occurred (heard of this before, but didn't realize that it had happened *here* until seeing this article).  The problem with your idea is that, despite Washington being a blue state, the southeastern corner, though sparsely populated, is drenched in red.  Conservatives, fundies, and teabaggers in this area have enormous chips on their shoulders, because those evil libs in Seattle get to decide everything.  It fills them with impotent rage.  (conservativetears.jpg)

The business might lose the few potential gay customers that are brave enough to be 'out' here, but by refusing to serve gay customers, they ensure that they will draw a lot of that conservative/fundie/teabagger business in support, like that Chick-fil-A hullabaloo awhile ago.  I wouldn't be surprised if business there is through the roof--and gets even better now that the evil gub'mint is involved and persecuting a good Christian for her beliefs.  This case pushes pretty much all of the conservative/fundie/teabagger buttons.
 
2013-04-10 01:42:58 PM

Spad31: No, of course I'm not trolling. If some shopkeeper is being an asshat, just take your money somewhere else.


This is a rational argument if you assume that all florists offer comparable goods. Maybe this specific florist has access to a type of flower another doesn't and I have my heart set on it. Or they create bouquets that are unrivaled by their competitors. Suddenly I have to settle for the second best florist (who may be far, far worse) simply because of my race/religion/etc.? If I'm forced to buy second-rate goods, then I'm a second class citizen.
 
2013-04-10 01:43:32 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Spad31: Benevolent Misanthrope: Spad31: Benevolent, just so we're clear love, I understand your point and agree. I just don't have the ability to make someone not be an asshole if they've decided they're going to be. no one does. The only thing I can do is take my business somewhere else, go try to continue having a good day and maybe get laid. Then a sammich or something.

You can't stop them, true, and neither can I.  But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off.  The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that.  You're being an asshole.  Quit it."

I'm glad you read and responded. Waited all day for it. ;)  I truly wasn't trolling you, you know. You've been here long enough that you're noticed and appreciated.

I'm still not convinced the AG has any ground to tell anyone what sort of customers they want to do business with. If some ass doesn't like a particular person, they don't have to do business with them. The customer isn't obligated in any way to give said ass money. They (the asshole) don't have to "quit it" because someone got their feelings hurt. Yes, that is a slippery slope...where do you draw the line? I'm of the mind we have too many folks worrying about too many things as it is and not enough just actual responsibility. But, I'm old and cranky, so there you go. Have a great day!

Slippery slope, indeed.  Looking forward to people getting sued by the State because they refused to strip and bend over for some gay guy who liked cut of their butt.


Interesting thought...

If we legalized prostitution, and can't discriminate against people based on sexual orientation, can prostitutes who are gender-selective be sued? Or would some other rules override that? (Employee protection rules, or establishment terms of service - I can get kicked out of a movie theater for talking on the phone, despite freedom of speech.)

We'd have to legalize prostitution first. You're just talking about rape, which will likely remain illegal.

Slippery slopes are usually pretty dumb, but I'll address this one:

As far as your hypothetical, I think it's mostly a matter of perspective. Anti-discrimination laws require businesses (and perhaps more importantly, government) not discriminate based on X, Y, or Z. They can still deny service for any number of other reasons, even made up ones. But when they do that, they need to not admit it.

She could easily have taken their order, discussed their needs, and then claimed that she was booked and would be too busy to do it. Recommending a competitor is a surefire way to tell a customer that you don't want to do business with them but are too polite to say so. WITHOUT breaking the law.

Business owners turn that around and complain that they're either being forced to serve people, or that they will be unable to deny service for legit reasons to people who are members of X, Y or Z group. Thing is, that's total bullshiat. If you walk into Starbucks, pee in a corner, threaten a barista, and call another customer a bunch of nasty names, it doesn't matter if you're gay, black, and in a wheelchair - you'll be asked to leave, and forced if necessary.
 
2013-04-10 01:44:11 PM

Begoggle: I'm the libbiest lib that ever libbed, but the AG is wrong.


No he isn't.  The florist gets her flowers delivered to her on roads that we all pay for, even gay people.  She has power which utilizes publicly subsidized infrastructure.  She is given fire protection and police protection, all paid for by the public, which includes gays.  Basically what many here are advocating is that everyone has to chip in and help dig the swimming pool, but only straight people can swim in it when it's done.
 
2013-04-10 01:44:34 PM
Anyway, long story short - religion is not a free pass to be a jerkass.
 
2013-04-10 01:44:36 PM
Hey bigoted homeless guy:
I will be certain to convert to being a Jehovah's Witness when you come into my ER bleeding to death and deny you a life saving blood transfusion.

//not really, but come on, discrimination should not be legally protected
 
2013-04-10 01:47:15 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: IRQ12: Not a protected class, see you in the supreme court.  If it makes it that far.

Protected class in WA.  STFU.


Ohh it's in WA.  I guess that means their laws can't be challenged.  Does this apply to cities in WA too?  Can I buy a city and then make any law I want that cannot be challenged?
 
2013-04-10 01:52:59 PM

IRQ12: Benevolent Misanthrope: IRQ12: Not a protected class, see you in the supreme court.  If it makes it that far.

Protected class in WA.  STFU.

Ohh it's in WA.  I guess that means their laws can't be challenged.  Does this apply to cities in WA too?  Can I buy a city and then make any law I want that cannot be challenged?


Considering your handle, are you trying to state that your IQ is 12? 'Cause that would make sense then.

/read the term 'electric potato' in a sci-fi novel last night
//it meant what Fark would think that it meant.
 
2013-04-10 01:53:13 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Gulper Eel: Benevolent Misanthrope: But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off. The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that. You're being an asshole. Quit it."

The People are able to see it as they choose without the state doing it for them. We don't have a situation here where gay couples are charged $2000 but straight couples get to pay $600 for the same flowers, and state would have a logical reason to step in. There are plenty of competing florists who would be delighted to take the gay couple's business. So what we have is a florist who's lost at the very least an employee two customers, and no doubt plenty more since she's earned herself a shiatload of bad press. Looks like the problem will solve itself without the state needing to ride to the rescue.

One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?

Excellent point, but that would probably be considered a failure to enable "hate speech" and would therefore be totally OK.


Nope, that'd be fine. The law doesn't say "you have to serve anyone and everyone, period." It says that you can't discriminate based on: "race, creed, color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability." There's nothing barring you from discrimination based on political belief.
 
2013-04-10 01:53:54 PM

TheOtherMisterP: The My Little Pony Killer: The residents of Washington State disagree with you, as our laws (you know, the entire reason the AG is involved in the first place?) state that people CANNOT deny business based on their personal feelings.

Then the laws should be changed.

Let's go the other way: could a florist refuse to provide floral service for a wedding at the Westboro Baptist Church? SHOULD they be allowed to refuse? If WBC wanted to hire any one of us for something, how would we respond?


What would I do if the WBC wanted to do business with me? I would tell them that I fully support everything that they stand against, and if they still want to give me their money, fine. I would even take their money.
 
2013-04-10 01:56:40 PM
Why is this worthy of a lawsuit?  She refused to do business with a couple.  If she took their money and gave them nothing in return, I could see a case.  But saying "No, your being gay is against my religious beliefs."  shouldn't be grounds for a lawsuit.  Just go to a different business who will cater to homosexuals.  This really gets to me because business owners should have the right to deny service to who ever they chose for what ever reason.  If they decide not to do business with you, find someone else.  Secondly, she cited her religious beliefs as the reason why.  Honestly, I don't give a damn about those beliefs, but if the government can step in and say "Yes, your religious beliefs say that homosexuality is a sin and you don't want to support it, but the law says you must or face a lawsuit."  is a dangerous overstep for the government in my opinion, and act as a precedent to allow for more government rules to bypass religious freedom.
 
2013-04-10 01:56:55 PM

IRQ12: Benevolent Misanthrope: IRQ12: Not a protected class, see you in the supreme court.  If it makes it that far.

Protected class in WA.  STFU.

Ohh it's in WA.  I guess that means their laws can't be challenged.  Does this apply to cities in WA too?  Can I buy a city and then make any law I want that cannot be challenged?


Damn - you're a thick sumbiatch.  Come back when you can demonstrate a semblance of understanding about protected classes, discrimination, and the relationship of local, state and federal government.
 
2013-04-10 01:57:20 PM

Mominator: TheOtherMisterP: The My Little Pony Killer: The residents of Washington State disagree with you, as our laws (you know, the entire reason the AG is involved in the first place?) state that people CANNOT deny business based on their personal feelings.

Then the laws should be changed.

Let's go the other way: could a florist refuse to provide floral service for a wedding at the Westboro Baptist Church? SHOULD they be allowed to refuse? If WBC wanted to hire any one of us for something, how would we respond?

What would I do if the WBC wanted to do business with me? I would tell them that I fully support everything that they stand against, and if they still want to give me their money, fine. I would even take their money.


The WBC would argue that you're refusing service based on their religion. You would argue that you're refusing service based on their political actions, and public trolling and harassment. If you could show that you've provided service to other Baptists, you'd probably be just fine. If, on the other hand, you have made a habit of coming up with excuses not to serve Baptists, then you'd probably not be as good.
 
2013-04-10 01:58:51 PM

Great Janitor: Why is this worthy of a lawsuit?  She refused to do business with a black person.  If she took their money and gave them nothing in return, I could see a case.  But saying "No, your being black is against my belief in the supremacy of the white race."  shouldn't be grounds for a lawsuit.  Just go to a different business who will cater to blacks.  This really gets to me because business owners should have the right to deny service to who ever they chose for what ever reason.  If they decide not to do business with you, find someone else.


images.sodahead.com
 
2013-04-10 02:03:09 PM

Theaetetus: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Gulper Eel: Benevolent Misanthrope: But the State AG, acting on behalf of The People, can tell her, "Hey - knock it the fark off. The People don't see that as acceptable behavior, and they've passed laws saying that. You're being an asshole. Quit it."

The People are able to see it as they choose without the state doing it for them. We don't have a situation here where gay couples are charged $2000 but straight couples get to pay $600 for the same flowers, and state would have a logical reason to step in. There are plenty of competing florists who would be delighted to take the gay couple's business. So what we have is a florist who's lost at the very least an employee two customers, and no doubt plenty more since she's earned herself a shiatload of bad press. Looks like the problem will solve itself without the state needing to ride to the rescue.

One of the commenters over at the Stranger brought up a good point, which I'll paraphrase: what if your friendly local Knights of Columbus chapter president walks into your print shop wanting a bunch of anti-same-sex-marriage flyers printed, and you tell him to go shiat in a hat?

I realize the Washington law applies to public accommodation, but does a flower order for a private wedding really fall under that heading?

Excellent point, but that would probably be considered a failure to enable "hate speech" and would therefore be totally OK.

Nope, that'd be fine. The law doesn't say "you have to serve anyone and everyone, period." It says that you can't discriminate based on: "race, creed, color, national origin, sex, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability." There's nothing barring you from discrimination based on political belief.


Just out of curiosity, wouldn't places like "Curves" be violating the law as well then?
 
2013-04-10 02:13:27 PM
I would have just moved onto another florist. Don't want my money? Fine. But you can't pay the rent with prayer.
 
2013-04-10 02:14:10 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: So you would be cool with a business owner refusing to serve someone because they were black?  Really?   Okay, now I know for sure you're trolling.  Got me.


I'm not "cool" with it, but why shouldn't it be allowed? Businesses are allowed to refuse to serve people because of their gender (think Curves), so why is race or religion any different?
 
2013-04-10 02:15:11 PM
So you are saying that the Soup Nazi can't say: "No soup for you!"
 
Displayed 50 of 273 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report