Florist sued again for refusing to provide flowers for gay wedding

That's really the bottom line here. Religion is totally irrelevant to this discussion and the topic under discussion as regards Washington state has nothing to do with an infringement on religious freedom, but everything to do with an infringement on freedom of association and freedom to engage in commerce.

 

if hanging a rainbow banner increased my sales, I'd hang 10 banners.

I am 100% against the lawsuits and hope to God they are tossed and the plaintiffs forced to pay reparation.

With that said, let's talk common sense. If you plan on opening a small business dealing with the general public then the only color which should concern you is green. You have expenses and also want to make money. If you decide that you don't like soccer players and won't serve them, then rest assured they will tell their friends and so on.

If you can't suck it up, kiss customers on all 4 cheeks and smile as you deposit their money, then you need to find a new trade.

That's just good business sense but in no way justifies the lawsuits.

 

Again I'm forced to ask: imagine if this was not a sexuality issue but rather a race thing. Would you still think the lawsuit is stupid?

 

Do you think doctors, congressmen and police officers should have those same unconditional freedoms? If not, why not?

 

Doctors are required by law to always serve the best interests of their patients. But they can certainly refuse to treat inividuals for a variety of reasons, all within the bounds of their licensure. Congressmen are elected to represent ALL the people, so that's their job, likewise cops.

IOW, if someone refuses to sell you flowers, you're not going to die. If a cop refuses to "protect and serve" you might. So, really we need to compare apples to apples here. Can Starbucks have a "no blacks" policy? Sure. Just like Popeyes can have a "no whitey" policy. It would be a very stupid move on the parts of noth businesses, however, to have such a policy because no matter the color of your skin (or which orifice into which you fancy inserting your john thomas), your money is green. Is this lady at the flower shop an ignorant buffoon? Yes. But the beauty of America is that you have the right to be an ignorant buffoon. YMMV.

 

For anyone who is wondering what is the Goal of the LGBTIQ,its called Queer Nationalism ,and they are advocating the Formation of a Queer Nation from the United Nations along the same lines as Israel ,yep,kid you not the genocide of an established nation so that they can achieve Gay Liberation.

Now if our GBLTIQAPC,thats gay,Lesbian ,bisexual ,Intersexual ,Transexual ,Queer,asexual ,Pansexual ,lets Just say ,Anti-Hetrosexual Community [its shorter]would like to nominate which Nation that the UN should invade and cleanse on the basis of sexual orientation the rest of us would be gratefull????

Well who do you want to genocide ?????

i am not joking ask the Palestinians ,if its a Possibility .

BTW, they are just a Lunatic fringe ,but they are a Dangerous fascistic Fringe.

Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Word of the Gay: "Queer Nationalism"


"Queer Nationalism" - The movement/dream for a homeland for LGBTQ people. Australian activists declared the Cato Islands the "Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea" in 2004. Organizations such as the Gay and Lesbian Commonwealth Kingdom, Unified Gay Tribe, and Gay Homeland Foundation embrace the idea of a Queer nation state. The premise is that Queers have a right to a safe and national homeland to embrace their identities freely and grow their culture. They also want recognition by the United Nations and a country where LGBTQ people have all the rights that are not afforded to them in other countries around the world.

And they DO NOT speak for the Homosexual or Bisexual communities BTW ,and they Never have formed a Political Party anywhere ,thats because they hate everyone except Lesbian and gay Identifiers.

http://search.mywebsearch.com/myweb...5TBBrCN/HXdl6XkvbnWanWBrbA4fCqfWG&ord=2&ct=AR&

These Lunatics also think that sexuality is a Choice not a biologic imperative ,and they wonder why the kids that try and believe this stuff go crazy ,as they will always say the the suicide rate of LGBTIQAP youth is higher then normal ,with the Gobbly goog these Nutters come out with small wonder.

yes ,meet queer Nationalism the Newest and most ridiculous form,coming to a Nation near you!

 

So you accept that these rights aren't unconditional but can be legitimately restricted in the situation where their discrimination could cause harm. That's a starting point some people seem unwilling (or unable) to even recognise.

Now I'm suggesting that culturally and legally supported (or promoted!) discrimination does cause harm. Creating a society where it is acceptable to treat certain individuals as second class citizens on the basis of general characteristics, not worthy to be offered even the basics of food and water (both provided by private businesses after all) could easily become massively harmful. You can look across the world or in to your (or our) own history to see clear examples of that.

On that basis, would it be wrong to limit rights to prevent harmful discrimination? Obviously there are questions, details and complications to address but I'm really just trying to break past the "These are rights, end of discussion!" sticking point in all debates around this area.

 

Stop being deceptive the GBLT is discrimatory by definition as well as being Anti-Scientific and Anti-hetrosexual ,BTW,as a bisexual I want 'B' taken out of the self proclaimed GBLT .formed a gay and lesbian rights Party yet Mak?

Moving to Cato Island any time soon?

Born homosexual ,Bisexual Hetro-sexual choose to be Gay and lesbian POLITICANS!

So as you well know ,gay and Lesbian has nothing to do with Equality and everything to do with reverse discrimination or your right to openly discriminate against hetrosexuals ,those who know the Lesbian movement up close know them to be RABID man haters ,thats why the Gays and lesbians don't get on the worse Misogynist Males I have ever met BTW ,are Gay Identifyin Men .

Stop the deception and tell everyone about the goals of Queer NATIONALISM <Mak?????

dare you to call me that Non word ,homophobe!

Lesbians don't like being called homosexual women do you know why ,Mak?????????

Which Nation do you want the United Nations to cleanse of hetrosexuals Mak??????????

Go on tell us????????????

[personal note Mak ,I am still taking ACON pty Ltd ,to the human rights commission] for everyone else ACON pty ltd is the Biggest GBLT organisation in australia ,and they have been denying Hiv aids services that are government funded to hetrosexuals and bisexuals for 25years as they reckon Hiv is a 'gay disease ' see what I mean ANTI_SCIENCE!

been helping a young women Born with Hiv Woman on that one MAK!

 

Homosexuals used to be able to see a shrink.

But then the psychiatrists caved to pressure from gays and no longer recognize homosexuality as a mental disorder.

 

let's make the comparison more accurate and we can discuss it

Imagine if they were vegetarians who were refused flowers? Now, we have a similar comparison.

With that said, the plaintiff should pay reparations to the florist. I would also counter-sue because I am confident that the bad press has not been good for the business and thus on-going damages continue.

 

So is it against the law for a business to post a dress code on the front door? I know plenty of restaurants that require jacket and or tie, plenty that require shirt and shoes. If you wanted to go eat in a bathing suit, should you be able to sue for discrimination? Plenty of other restaurants around to eat at of course. What about an all-girls boarding school? If someone wanted to send their son there, they could sue for discrimination, right? Some dating websites refuse allowing you membership unless you pass a psych test. If you failed, could you sue for discrimination?

 

No. (*)(*)(*)(*) your faulty, flawed analogies, answer the (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) question.

 

And (*)(*)(*)(*) your faulty, flawed analogies as well.

 

one question I have, and it's been glossed over, which could settle any debate as to the validity of the complaint and where it lies constitutionally speaking....

the title of the thread was "sued AGAIN...." as in, this has happened to this florist before.



what was the results of the first lawsuit. If there was something to it, he would have had a previous judgement against him, correct? if it was dismissed, that would kinda say to me that this shop owener is being harrassed because he publically doesn't accept the gay lifestyle. If the case was already dismissed once, this is politically bullying by a group who is pissed he doesn't accept them.


so what happened in previous cases?

 

you really need to expand your interests. The world does not really care what you do in your bedroom any more than they care what I do.

there are college scholarships specifically for homosexuals and cross dressers
there are college scholarships specifically for musicians, artists etc

should heterosexuals sue the gay/cross dressing scholarships?
should architects sue the music scholarships?

Just because something makes you mad doesn't make it wrong.

Maybe you didn't get the memo: most of us could give a flying rip who, what or how you diddle. If you are a dentist then please fill my cavity. If you are a fireman then please put out my fire. If you come into my store, then please spend a lot of money

why is it with you that the descriptor is more important? It is a "gay couple" that is suing. So what? I again ask, does being gay make you a different species/race/gender? Go to another florist and move on with their insignificant lives

- - - Updated - - -

read the article and you will find that what you are implying is a fantasy within your head. The same incident is being sued in 2 separate cases.

You do understand that being sued is not a criminal issue, it's a civil one and most suits never make it to court.

 

No. You being wrong makes you wrong. Homosexuality is more than just where you stick your dick, and if you refuse to acknowledge that, then look through that post for the term "Homofabulosity", because if you insist on playing stupid, stuuuuupid word games, then I'll play along; the facts remain the same. If you insist on defining homosexuality the way you do, despite every reliable source telling you that you are wrong, then we'll make a new word that means what homosexuality means to homosexuals (and which accurately applies), and use that instead.

 

I read the article, it said THIS florist is being sued AGAIN. but no mention of the original ruling.

 

What's faulty? Under your logic, technically no business can make ANY rules in how they want to conduct business, since anyone can supersede those rules if they disagree. Where I work, our sales reps no longer can have facial hair, because to us it seems less professional and overall a clean shaven image is more positive. No visible tattoos either. We're letting people who've been around a while, keep theirs. But anyone newer has to shave or find another position or leave. Is that discrimination?

Explain whats flawed please? What is different in a restaurant not serving someone for dressing a certain way or a florist not selling flowers because they don't approve of the event? If a florist didn't want to sell me flowers because my Jewish star was hanging out, I'd say "^%&$*$ you" and buy flowers from the 10 other florists in town. Would I waste time suing them? Are you crazy? I wouldn't waste a brain cell thinking about them after I walked out the door, besides not recommending them to anyone I know. Let the free market sort it out. I don't think any business that is openly ANTI-gay will be highly successful now a days, considering how accepting everyone is. Is being gay special? Not really. No different than anyone.

 

Here's the flaw. If you can lift a razor or visit a barber, you can get a clean-shaven image. If you have a beard, it's your choice. However, if your business said "We can't have blacks sales reps", there'd be a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing riot, and with good reason! And believe it or not, an immutable quality of your person that impacts how you live your life, that you cannot change or abandon, and which you did not choose is a hell of a lot closer to a skin color than a hairstyle.

 

perhaps I flunked English

The ACLU has filed a discrimination lawsuit against a florist in Washington State who says she would not sell flowers for a gay couple's wedding because of her religious beliefs. The state is already prosecuting her under a consumer protection law.



same florist
same incident
we now have 2 misguided entities along with a misguided couple of gay guys

The florist will win and will get reparations because at the end of the day, no harm was done to the gay people but severe harm has been done, and continues to be done to the florist. The injuries continue to the florist because of the gays, the ACLU and the state. The gays had their wedding and their single event has closed.

And just because someone files a lawsuit, including misguided state employees, does not mean they are just in doing so.

 

Good god, just go to another flowers shop, these days I'm surprised that half of the flower shops aren't ran by gay men anyway.

Guess they'd just rather make a federal case out of it.

 

maybe the florist is the only one within 10 miles, who knows. But, another florist would probably be tickled pink to get the business. Heck, the other florist could get some media coverage with article about how they saved 2 brides or is it 2 grooms, from a wedding disaster. Who would not want to give business to a florist who "saved the day"

As an evil capitalist, I'd gladly take their business, be sure they weren't paying a penny more than with the other florist and would contact the local press myself. "bring your business to the tolerant florist" would be my rallying cry. cha-ching

 

Excuse me for saying something but every Seller of goods and services has the right to sell or not ?

If you don't like the seller in a market ,then move along someone else will sell@ CAPITIALISM ,the right of the Buyer not to buy and the right of the seller of commodities not to sell ,sems pretty clear to this sosialist ,yep buyers and sellers meet in the market and hey can do with what they own as they wish ?????

It is not discrimination just trade as it has been since like ever since things have been bought and sold!

 

bet if the florists were islamo's refusing to provide flowers to a Jewish wedding we would never see this in the news.

 

You obviously do not know what discrimination is.