https://www.foxnews.com/politics/wa...t-who-refused-service-for-gay-couples-wedding snip In the new decision, the Washington Supreme Court defended its initial ruling, stating that the state's public accommodation law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and that Stutzman discriminated against Robert Ingersoll because he was marrying a man. end snip Basically, Washington State has determined that how one chooses to engage in sex takes priority over ones religion. This should now go to the USSC because this country was founded upon religious liberty, not how one has sex.
Selling flowers does not violate any religion on earth, nor prevent the owner from practicing their religion. Which imaginary deity one chooses to believe in, doesn’t exclude you from being subject to the law.
Not sure why you are going to start up a business if you are going to base who you do business with on your religion. I don't admonish them for their choice I just think it's counterproductive.
