By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
We previously wrote HERE of Richland, Washington Florist Baronelle Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers, who caused a row when she refused to provide her floral services for a gay wedding. Now, a Benton County Superior Court Judge ruled that she violated the state’s consumer protection act that bars discrimination against a protected class.
The legal action was brought by customer Robert Ingersoll and the Washington Attorney General’s Office.
Judge Alex Ekstom rejected Baronelle’s arguments that her actions were protected by free speech and religious freedom guarantees stating in part:
“For over 135 years, the Supreme Court has held that laws may prohibit religiously motivated action, as opposed to belief. The Courts have confirmed the power of the Legislative Branch to prohibit conduct it deems discriminatory, even where the motivation for that conduct is grounded in religious belief.”
Robert had been a customer of Arlene’s Flowers for several years prior to the incident in question. Baronelle was aware that he was gay and had a partner Curt Freed for whom he purchased flowers. When Washington statutorily provided for gay marriage in 2012, Robert asked Baronelle to make the wedding arrangement for him. But, Baronelle declined, putting her hand upon Robert’s and stating that “because of [her] relationship with Jesus Christ”, she would not be able to do so—according to her statement in a deposition.
Curt and Robert sued. They cited the Washington Consumer Protection Act and its laws against discrimination. They supported by the Washington Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and the State Attorney General who welcomed the Superior Court ruling.
Attorney General Bob Ferguson in a statement said:
“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.”
The state is seeking the two thousand dollar fine the statute provides.
The Alliance Defending Freedom organization announced the day after it would on behalf of Baronelle appeal the ruling. The alliance claimed that the ruling would bring financial ruin Baronelle and Arlene’s Flowers
By Darren Smith
Source: KOMO News
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
I support gay marriage, because I don’t want to stand in the way of the happiness of 2 consenting adults. I also want them to enjoy the rights and protections of marriage, such as being considered “next of kin” in a medical emergency.
I do not want government forcing religious institutions of sanctify gay marriage. There are plenty of religious denominations, or civil ceremonies, where same sex couples can get married. If one church or temple does not meet your needs, find another.
One of the arguments I have made for years to people to support gay marriage is that it does not affect anyone else. So imagine the egg on my face to find that people target businesses that do not support gay marriage, inundating them with requests for services at gay weddings. Each refusal is one count that incurs a fine. Then they get sued and driven out of business.
For years I have been urging gay marriage as humane, and believing that hearts and minds will change gradually. But now over just a few years, it’s become a way to target people, and destroy their livelihoods, if they hold a different opinion. Obama himself believed marriage to be between a man and a woman in 2008. Hillary has said a similar thing. Both their opinions “evolved,” but they were not driven out of political office for opposing gay marriage.
The whole “it doesn’t affect us” argument just got destroyed. I wonder how many people would support gay marriage if the poll question included a phrase about those who don’t would lose their jobs/businesses and would be targeted with harassment.
I think many people feel as I do. I don’t want gays refused service in restaurants, but I don’t want a large segment of the population targeted and driven to the poor house for their religious belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. It is very troubling to see the tactics used to promote gay marriage, which ruin the humane aspect of the dilemma.
Here is an interesting article from 2007 on discrimination laws:
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/the-right-to-refuse-service-can-a-business-refuse-service-to-someone-because-of-appearance
Karen S wrote: “I support gay marriage, because I don’t want to stand in the way of the happiness of 2 consenting adults. I also want them to enjoy the rights and protections of marriage, such as being considered “next of kin” in a medical emergency.”
I share your concerns about these issues too. The 1996 HIPAA laws created these problems, but they should not be used to destroy marriage. All of the required protections for same sex couples can be accomplished in law through identifying the relationship as a Domestic Partnership. California already did this prior to 2008 when in a 4-3 decision they declared it unconstitutional to define marriage as a union between the opposite sexes.
We cannot redefine marriage and expect that the institution of marriage will not be changed for everyone. The homosexuals have basically changed marriage into being a long term roommate arrangement that has very little value. Expect the terms husband and wife to be increasingly abandoned for baby daddy and baby momma, and the concept of family also will be destroyed.
So her “religious” beliefs prevented her from selling flowers for a “wedding”.
It was OK to sell him flowers for his boyfriend but wrong to sell him flowers for his wedding. And how do you make this distinction?
Does she provide flowers to customers that have had premarital sex?
Does she provide flowers to someone in a second marriage?
How about if someone eats pork?
Has she ever made a flower arrangement on the Sabbath (Saturday).
So what is her religion exactly?
And really, what would Jesus do? I think he would have made the flower arrangement and gone to the wedding and provided the wine. I mean come on, he had dinner at a tax collectors house. And didn’t he also cavort with prostitutes? 2000 years ago the lowest of the low were tax collectors and prostitutes and he mingled with both.
So don’t give me this crap about what Jesus would do. I don’t have a clue and neither do you.
How do you know? Jesus Scriptures are like the Shroud of Turin to me 😉
What is a specific principle when it comes to practicing love between consenting adults.
Happy
I have no animus towards gay people or even same sex marriage. If gays want to get married. Oh well….go ahead. I actually “could not care less” one way or the other.
What I do care about is people being able to exercise their rights and not be trampled upon. As a libertarian, I think that we should have the right to refuse to do business if we feel like it for any reason whatsoever, just as people have the right to refuse to patronize businesses we disagree with.
IF…..let me reiterate….IF (and I suppose it is because she is making an issue) it is against her religious tenets to actively participate in what SHE considers to be a sinful act, then she should not be forced to do so based on her First Amendment right to religion and to worship. Personally, I would have made the flower arrangement. But then again. I….Don’t….Care. It means nothing to me. TO her however, it does mean a great deal. Evidently.
If you are Muslim and think that pork or bacon is an abomination, you have the right to never step foot into my restaurant. You do not have the right to force me to abandon making BLTs for other people who do not have your religious principles. I also do not have the right to force you to eat a BLTs as a tenet of my Baconafarian cult. I made that up….there is no such thing. 😉
What two consenting adults do between themselves and in the privacy of their own home, is none of my business. It becomes my business when (if) I am forced to be a participant.
Since it is now law that you have to participate in homosexual marriage, whether you want to or not, then I guess the recourse is to go out of business or only contract privately with people you know and not profess yourself to be in business, if you feel that strongly about it.
DBQ
I don’t think they wanted you to participate. lol
I speak because I see all sides of the issue and feel the hurt feeling and somehow I just feel like that in the long run, the minorities get trampled on. It is just my opinion. It always has been. I am more left leaning than you. But start talking about money and things really need to straighten out and people really need to get just a bit more hones imo
DBQ
What is a specific principle when it comes to practicing love between consenting adults. I think it is mean spirited and deserve a mean reaction from a resident from a small community. Personally it raises my hackles. I guess I am part dog or something. It’s like, “I kind of accept you but not really.”
if she knew he was a gay man, buying flowers for another man, then why didn’t her religious beliefs stop her THEN???
@ Jeannee
I would guess, because her religious principles are against participating in same sex marriage, which is against her religious beliefs and not in just selling flowers for other purposes. A fairly specific principle.
Jeannee
Her love of Mammon was greater perhaps?
Zack
really?
I’m going to possibly split hairs here and say this: if she knew he was a gay man, buying flowers for another man, then why didn’t her religious beliefs stop her THEN???
I am with you Jeanne
Jeannee wrote: “… if she knew he was a gay man, buying flowers for another man, then why didn’t her religious beliefs stop her THEN???”
I don’t think any religion has a problem with a man buying flowers for another man. Two men loving each other passionately is fine too. The Bible even mentions the young disciple John laying his head on Jesus’s chest during the Last Supper. Marriage, however, is a completely different thing entirely.
From a religious perspective, God had a purpose in creating humans as male and female, and part of that purpose was for them, as two different kinds of humans, to come together in union, reproduce and create a family. Saying that marriage is acceptable for two men or two women to come together makes a mockery of God and his purpose in creating humans as two different sexes in the first place. It destroys that natural order that God established with specific purpose in the beginning. It thwarts the purpose of God in creating sex.
It’s obvious she doesn’t care that Ingersoll is gay. She voluntarily sold him flowers knowing he is homosexual and he voluntarily paid her for them. It was only when she believed that commemorating a homosexual marriage violated the tenets of her faith that she declined to trade with him.
A reasonable, sane person would respect that. Ingersoll wants to use government coercion to force her to violate her faith just because he can.
He’s a jerk. And the law is a ass.
If doing business with whomever we want means being able to discriminate against certain people based on class, status, sex, orientation, color, creed, etc.
… Then expect protections to arise in the legal world to protect the victims of such discrimination in the first place.
See J
If you want to hate, keep it in your heart… ok.
Because sharing that hate hurts you, too.
You want to see some real hate – go back some threads. This is a sweet one so lets keep it sweet. Love peace and haaaapppiiineeeessss.
What Would Jesus Do? It’s tough to tell.
Jesus, himself, never married, of course. But he did tell a parable of a Godly and generous king who invited his servants to a lavish wedding feast. That king, however, also had a pretty brutal policy on those who responded to his invitations with “Regrets” (he had them slain) and also harshly enforced a dress code for attendees (“there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth”). Matthew 22:1-14.
Jesus did personally attend the Wedding Feast at Cana in his early thirties. He even provided some excellent wine. However, Jesus also appears to have attended that wedding without a date and accompanied by his mother and twelve guys. John 2:1-10
Jesus seems a bit, um, conflicted on the subject of weddings.
Fiver
Jesus taught us how to live and we never got it.
They are appealing the $1 fine because… ?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/florist-who-refused-to-do-flowers-for-gay-wedding-to-appeal/2015/02/19/361e2ad0-b8a3-11e4-bc30-a4e75503948a_story.html
I think we should be able to do business with whomever we want–that is sort of how business works. If I’m forced to sell here and forced to buy here (which we already have plenty of), then we might as well forget the 50 states and move towards socialism. You people want to end discrimination? Try being the freak boy that no girl talks to, and everyone wants out of their store because he doesn’t look like anyone else. Dude certainly won’t ever get a sales position in life. The “protected class” concept is an abstraction in which the lawyers thrive off of.
J
I promise you that it’s an awkward stage you will soon grow out of and they will sell you cakes at that bakery without you having to sue them
We’d all laugh at anyone thinking that their religious beliefs would allow them to deny someone eating at their establishment’s lunch counter if they opposed serving blacks… RELIGIOUS LIBERTY PEOPLE!!!!!
Religious Liberty is but a shield for discrimination in the public sector…
happypappies,
Well that there proves that Jesus went to hell over loving gays…
… He said so much about us.
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1529140/thumbs/o-BLANK-PAGE-570.jpg?3
According to some of the Eastern Orthodox Faiths Jesus rested “as a Serpent in the Bosom of Abraham” for 2 days with the dead in Hell comforting them
Matthew 11:28New International Version (NIV)
28 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.
Oops, sorry about the misspelling Zack.
Zach
Yes, thank goodness for the Mormons having saved Christ!
happypappies
“We are a Christian Nation right?”
= = =
Good question.
Jesus was tortured… check
Jesus was left poor… check
Jesus started wars… check
Jesus denied gays… check
Jesus judged Faith… check
Yep, Christian Nation… check, check and check!