State Sues Florist Who Refused to Decorate Gay Wedding

The State of Washington is suing a small flower shop after the owner declined to provide flowers for a homosexual wedding – based on her religious beliefs.

Barronelle Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, Wash., is facing thousands of dollars in fines and penalties for allegedly violating the state’s Consumer Protection Act.

“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,” Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a statement.

On March 1, a longtime customer asked Stutzman to provide flowers for his upcoming same-sex wedding. According to court documents, she told him that she would not be able to do so “because of her relationship with Jesus Christ.”

The Attorney General’s office sent a letter to the florist on March 28 giving her a chance to reconsider her position and sign an agreement indicating her intention to comply with the law. But Stutzman refused.

“Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers on the basis of sexual orientation,” the attorney general said.

In their letter to Stutzman, they told her the only way to avoid a lawsuit was to agree to provide services for homosexual weddings.

“This means that as a seller of goods or services, you will not refuse to sell floral arrangements for same-sex weddings if you sell floral arrangements for opposite-sex weddings,” the attorney general’s office wrote.



Attorney JD Bristol called the notion that his client was guilty of discrimination “nonsense.”

“Arlene’s Flowers has catered to all patrons, including homosexuals, for many years,” Bristol wrote in his reply to the Attorney General. “Arlene’s Flowers has had openly gay employees.”

He told The Seattle Times that he believes the state is trying to make an example of the flower shop.

“This is about gay marriage, it’s not about a person being gay,” he told the newspaper. “She has a conscientious objection to homosexual marriage, not homosexuality. It violates her conscience.”

Bristol said he believes this is a freedom of religion issue.

“What the government is saying here is that you don’t have the right to free religious exercise,” he told the newspaper.

Religious liberty groups in Washington and across the country are voicing their support for the flower shop.

“You may not be a florist, and you may have made a different decision, but liberty is at stake for all of us,” said Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington. “Draw your line in the sand right here.”

Backholm sent an email blast urging supporters to stand with Arlene’s Flowers.

“Don’t ignore the bully just because he hasn’t punched you in the mouth yet,” he said. “A small business owner is looking at years of litigation and huge legal expenses because she won’t bow to the political elites.”

Peter Sprigg, with the Family Research Council, told Fox News they are seeing more and more of these types of cases.

“People need to be aware this is the underlying motive for the push for same sex marriage,” he said. “It’s not just about legal rights and benefits. It’s about forcing everyone in society to recognize their relationships as being one hundred percent equal to opposite sex marriages.”

He called the lawsuit a dangerous step towards encroaching on religious liberty.

“It also reflects a narrow view of religious liberty where people may have freedom to exercise religious liberty in their church but they don’t have that right when they go outside those four walls,” he said.

The Attorney General is seeking a permanent injunction forcing the flower shop to comply with the law – as well as $2,000 in fines for every violation.


Your religious views be damned when it comes to homos. Their happiness trumps your rights.

Have a nice day.

 

I wonder why online gay-only dating sites aren't also required by law to allow listings by straight singles?

https://www.google.com/search?q=gay...hrome.0.57j62.2753j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

It is a private business. There was no agreement between the business and the consumer. The state can’t sue as they don’t have any grounds for it. That is the case normally anyway. However, this is Washington a pretty liberal state so who knows.

 

Were the florists being required to perform the ceremony and sign the marriage license as a justice of the peace?

If not, what do they care what the flowers were used for?

- - - Updated - - -

Why are you cruising gay dating sites?

 

If the woman wants to lose a customer base because she wont serve homosexuals, that's her business. I don't think anyone should have to serve anyone they don't want to based on race or religion sex or what ever, the market will punish them enough, we don't need more government intrusion.

 

So if the shop refused to do business with them because they were black or jewish that would be okay with you?

 

Absolutely.

You wont stay in business long excluding people like that, the problem works itself out.

 

It is a privite business. It dosn't matter what I would be ok with or not. If I don't like what they are doing then I am free to shop elsewhere.

 

So if the customer was black and they refused you'd be okay with that?

 

Same reason a gay couple was cruising a flower shop owned by a Christian I guess.

 

Ya, but homos are like 3% of the pop and jews are like 2%...so ya, you can stay in business a long time refusing 5% of the pop.

 

This case needs to go straight to the top. Freedom of religion vs freedom of religion. Suing one person for refusing to subjegate their religious beliefs to another religion is going to fall flat on its face. Go ahead Washington state. Fall flat on your face, lose a ton of money in this depression when the flower shop counter-sues you and also national disgrace when your case loses at the Top.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=bla...me.0.0l4j62l2.2226j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Why is a dating site allowed to accept only black members?

 

Ya, but homos are like 3% of the pop and jews are like 2%...so ya, you can stay in business a long time refusing 5% of the pop.

 

C'est la vie

 

Well I'm not, I'm entirely against gay or black dating sites refusing members simply because of their skin color or sexuality

 

Many Americans would not shop at a place that discriminates, the problem would fix itself, let the market work.

 

Ummm, business owners have a right who they choose to do business with. How is this hard for you to understand?

 

I'm curious why the same logic doesn't seem to apply to say, a dating site. If you search "black dating" or "gay dating" you'll find plenty of sites for gay member, or black members only - so they are likewise discriminating based on sexuality or skin color.

Why aren't the people 'outraged' over this shop likewise outraged over these dating sites? It's obviously not 'discrimination' which is the problem, it's just the race/sexuality of the ones being allegedly 'discriminated' against.

 

I think private businesses or individuals should be allowed to discriminate for any reason they see fit when selling their property. I will gladly use my ability to free speech and association to boycott said businesses that discriminate on reasons such color of skin or sexual preference. They will lose more than just the business of those they don't want to serve. I think it will be a far better lesson for them in the end when they go bankrupt that they can see that their prejudice hurt them. When government forces them to deal with people they don't want to all it does is help cement and ferment their hatred. Lets teach lessons, not force outcomes.

 

It is a private business. It doesn’t matter with what I am would be ok with or not. They can choose to work with who ever they want to. It is a bad business model but it boils down to this; it is their business.

 

Hm, so you're planning to boycott all 'gay dating sites' or 'black dating sites' because of their 'prejudice and hatred'? There are tons of them.

 

How would they know they were christian until they refused service because Jebus told them to?

- - - Updated - - -

Because you know, gaydom is a religion....

- - - Updated - - -

Because you know, gaydom is a religion....

 

I'm sure they took a hint after they were refused service.

Did gay Jesus tell the owners of gay dating sites not to allow straight members?

 

Uh oh. You don't mean the STAY PUFT MARSHMALLOW MAN in the sky?

PLEASE GOD, ANYTHING BUT THAT!