Washington State Sues Florist for Declining to Beautify Same-Sex ‘Wedding’

The National Catholic Register ^ | 4/16/13 | Sue Ellen Browder

[marshmallow]

Attorney general says that Barronelle Stutzman violated a state consumer-protection law when she turned down business from a homosexual couple.

RICHMOND, Wash. — Since being sued for declining to use her flower-arranging talents to adorn a same-sex “wedding,” Barronelle Stutzman has seen her flower-shop business blossom.

Local community support for her 47-year-old shop, Arlene’s Flowers & Gifts, has been “absolutely fantastic,” Stutzman cheerfully told the Register. “We’ve had more walk-in traffic than ever. People have come in to order $100 bouquets and donate $50 for our legal expenses.”

The hullabaloo erupted last week, after Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed a lawsuit claiming that Stutzman, 68, violated a 2006 state consumer-protection law that says you can’t refuse to sell goods and services based on a person’s sexual orientation.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has stepped in to represent the homosexual couple.

An ACLU letter to Arlene’s Flowers, dated April 10, makes three demands: It asks that Stutzman stop refusing to serve customers based on sexual orientation, publish an apology in the Tri-City Herald and donate $5,000 to the Vista Youth Center, advertised as a place for “gay, bi, trans, queer, questioning and allied youth.”

At this writing, the ACLU had received no response to the letter.

[Da Coyote]

FUACLU.

FUACLU.

FUACLU.

[coloradan]

It’s a shame that the right of freedom of association is no longer recognized. Inherent in the right to freely associate, of course, is the right to not associate with chosen people.

[jboot]

Coming soon to your business and your church.

I hope everybody is ready. No conspiracy theories here, this is the real deal and it kicks off as soon as SCOTUS rules.

[Blue Turtle]

This will happen to churches that refuse to marry....

[mardi59]

I guess it’s okay for them to violate her religious beliefs, or protect the Boston Terrorist.

[fwdude]

No conspiracy theories here, this is the real deal and it kicks off as soon as SCOTUS rules.

What makes you think SCOTUS will rule unfavorably to real Americans? I think we may be surprised.

[cripplecreek]

Barry Goldwater was right.

[jboot]

It’s a shame that the right of freedom of association is no longer recognized

That right was ripped away in 1964 to thunderous applause and general celebration by the majority of Americans. Those who dissented were and are still considered racists.

[Our man in washington]

At this writing, the ACLU had received no response to the letter.

I know many Freepers who would be DELIGHTED to write that letter.

[Vigilanteman]

It would be brief. Something like post #2.

[cripplecreek]

That right was ripped away in 1964 to thunderous applause and general celebration by the majority of Americans.

A good many of them are FReepers. Just suggest that a business should be allowed to turn away and race, religion, or ideology and let the free market take its course. They recoil in horror.

[jboot]

What makes anyone think that SCOTUS will rule against homosex marriage? Four of the nine would rule to outlaw marriage altogether tomorrow if that was what True Progressivism demanded, and some of the others are wont to go where the popular winds are blowing, lest they fail to be invited to all the best parties. IMO the fix is in on this one. I'd love to be wrong, but I'm not.

[jboot]

Cultural conditioning runs very deep. If you own a business, who is the government to tell you who you can and can’t do business with? But few can accept that.

[knife6375]

I do believe your comment hit the nail on the head.

[jboot]

Thx. Being right doesn’t help much, though. For once I’d rather be 100% off-base!

[cripplecreek]

I personally wouldn’t turn any reasonable and rational business away but for any who would, there will be still more who will cater to those turned away elsewhere.

In my opinion, the civil rights amendment was extremely damaging to the free market.

[RedMDer]

You want me to do what?

[alancarp]

Her defense should be that she refused their business over a wedding, not over their individual ‘orientations’.

[dragonblustar]

What makes you think SCOTUS will rule unfavorably to real Americans? I think we may be surprised.

I suspect Roberts will come out singing, " It's raining men".