Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene's Flowers, poses for a photo outside of her Richland, Washington, floral shop.
Posted on 02/21/2015 10:27:36 AM PST by NYer
Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene's Flowers, poses for a photo outside of her Richland, Washington, floral shop.
Putting florist, grandmother and devout Southern Baptist Barronelle Stutzman out of business was not enough for some Washington state officials. She could lose her home and life savings as well after a Washington superior court judge ruled that she violated the state's anti-discrimination law because she declined to provide flowers for a same-sex couple's wedding due to her religious convictions.
After Benton County Superior Court Judge ruled on Wednesday that Stutzman violated the law when she refused to provide floral arrangements for the wedding of Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed in 2013, the possibility became real that Stutzman can lose her business, home, savings and other personal assets once a summary judgement is reached, according to Stutzman's lawyer Kristen Waggoner.
"The lesson from the court's decisions is that you put your home, your family business, and your life at risk by daring to defy a government mandate that forces you to promote views you believe are wrong," Waggoner, an attorney with the Alliance Defending Freedom, said in a statement. "A government that tells you what you can't say is bad enough but a government that tells you what you must say is terrifying."
Although Stutzman, who is the owner of Arlene's Flowers in Richland, has received thousands of hate letters, insults and threats from LGBT activists who decry her as prejudiced for not providing flowers to Ingersoll and Freed's wedding, Stutzman willfully served all of Ingersoll's floral requests for the nine years that Ingersoll came to her shop to buy flowers for Freed.
"She had established a really warm relationship with Rob Ingersoll, who had been in for nine years and come in and spent a good amount of money throughout the years and they had gotten to know each other pretty well," Waggoner said in a video posted to ADF website.
"He has a very creative mind and we just kind of hit it off," Stutzman admitted.
In the video, Stutzman discusses how she prepared many floral arrangements for Ingersoll over the years. She explained that she had no problem making flowers for Ingersoll and Freed to send to one another.
But a few months after gay marriage was passed in Washington in 2012, Ingersoll came to the shop and told Stutzman that he was getting married and he wanted her to provide the flowers for the wedding. Stutzman was caught in a tough spot as she did not want to hurt her friend's feelings and did not want defy her religious convictions that tell her that marriage is only between a man and a woman.
"It was a real struggle to decide what to do with that. My husband and I talked it over and as much as I loved Rob, I just couldn't be a part of that," Stutzman asserted. "If I did Rob's wedding, it would be from my heart because I think he is a really special person and I would want to make it really special for him. It wasn't something that I said, 'Oh, I'm not going to do Rob's wedding because he is gay.'"
"I think most artistic people, especially painters, they put their heart into their arrangements as part of them and part of who they are. I think that is the same thing with a florist," Stutzman added.
When Stutzman told Ingersoll that she would not be able to service his wedding, she did not expect to receive backlash. The news of Stutzman's denial of service for a gay wedding hit social media and stirred outrage and even caught the attention of Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson.
Ferguson's office later filed a lawsuit on behalf of Washington state against Stutzman, after sending Stutzman a letter demanding that she service gay weddings. Even though no official complaint was filed against Stutzman, Ferguson's office pursued the lawsuit and accused Stutzman and her business of violating the state's non-discrimination laws.
"The attorney general's action in this case is unprecedented in Washington state," Waggoner explained. "We have never had an attorney general take the position that this attorney general has taken."
After news of the state's lawsuit against Stutzman broke, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on behalf of the gay couple, even though Waggoner says the couple admitted getting offers from over 20 different florists to provide flowers for their wedding for free.
In January, Judge Eckstrom ruled that Stutzman could also be sued on a personal level in addition to being sued on a business capacity. Stutzman is not only at risk of paying the $2,000 fine for violating the state's discrimination law, but is also at risk of having to pay thousands of dollars in legal fees, which could result in her losing her home and business, Waggoner claims.
"She is at great risk as a result of serving someone lovingly and in a kind way for nine years," Waggoner said. "Because you won't do one same sex wedding, you are going to lose your house or your business and she's been working in this business for 40 years."
Waggoner said penalizing someone for acting on their own religious beliefs violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Waggoner said ADF plans to appeal the judge's ruling.
"This is about marriage. It's not about bigotry. She knew of their [homosexual] relationship. She provided flowers that she sent to each other. But when it came to marriage, that was the line. Because, as she will tell you, 'Marriage represents the relationship of Christ and His church.' It's a sacred covenant," Waggoner contends. "This case is coercing someone to engage in expression and that is against America's tradition and it's unconstitutional."
Even though Stutzman is being portrayed by critics and some media outlets as an intolerable anti-homosexual, Stutzman has employed many homosexuals in her shop in the past.
"I have hired all walks of people in different circumstances, and had the privilege of working with some very talented people that happen to be gay," Stutzman wrote in a Facebook post. "Since that day, we have received many comments on same-sex marriages. I believe, biblically, that marriage is between a man and a woman. That is my conviction, yours may be different."
Despite the countless hate letters she received, Stutzman said that she also receives letters of support from Christians all around the world encouraging her to stand strong in her Christian convictions.
"I have to have faith that He is going to protect me and give me the courage, the knowledge and the wisdom to stand firm on this," Stutzman asserted. "This has also helped me understand what obedience is and… what following Christ is. You can't sit on the fence and like He says, 'You can't be lukewarm.' That's what I was. I was lukewarm."
A Liberal can be your “Friend”, as long as you agree with them. Where we Conservatives will laugh off some stupid thing that a Liberal says or does, the Liberal would eagerly put you in a Reeducation Camp for defying their beliefs.
Welcome to the Fundamentally Changed America Comrades.
May God Bless this brave Woman.
The problem is the effing Attorney General of that state! Jeeze, Louise! Fight CRIME, put the Bad Guys in JAIL - not this stupidity! The gays didn’t even file the complaint against her - though I’m sure they threw a hissy fit. *Rolleyes*
“Waggoner said penalizing someone for acting on their own religious beliefs violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Waggoner said ADF plans to appeal the judge’s ruling.”
Appeal, appeal, appeal! And then appeal some more!
If homosexuals have a right to a marriage certificate, people who find this conflicts with their religoon have an equal right to refuse to participate.
The same for the cake bakers in Oregon. No jury trial, just a decree by a judge.
People need to demand jury trials!
People get jury trials. Corporations don't.
The solution is disincorporation. It's the elephant in the living room. This kind of atrocity will continue until Christians find the courage to admit the existence of the elephant.
It’s heating up, getting close to a flashpoint. All we need is a spark.
The Washington state anti-discrimination laws are a direct violation of the 1st Amendments freedom of assembly clause. The first amendment protects the right to peacefully assemble for the purpose of business and also protects the right to NOT assemble.
The trend in Federal court seems to be the broadening of individual rights; gun ownership, CCW, gay rights, so her 1st amendment argument likely has some traction. Thats going to take awhile though. In the meantime, I wonder if gay bakers will be sued and fined into oblivion for refusing to make "God Hates Fags" wedding cakes for the Westboro crew?
Go ahead and serve them...replace the chocolate in the cakes with Ex-Lax, and lace the “bride’s” bouquet with poison ivy...that should make for an interesting honeymoon.
Jesus said pick up your cross and follow me. To follow the goodness of our Christ is fraught with pain and hardship. But we know it is the only way to be a holy people.
Straight, the new jews.
Why the hell isn’t this a violation of her God-given Constitutional Right of “Freedom of Association”...found in the First Amendment?
I agree, but I don’t roll over when faced with evil.
“Actually when they come to take my home over these a hole lovers, they will be stacked like cord wood here.”
I’ll pitch in and help. Drop me a line if you ever need it.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 effectively abolished freedom of association.
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"
High level fines and/or loss of a home or comparable property are way out of proportion to the claimed offense.
The only explanation for inflicting such a high level of punishment is vindictiveness, revenge or to cow any other heterosexuals who may be inclined to assert their religious principles in similar cases.
The judge has some sort of a personal investment in promoting the homosexual tyranny or has completely lost track of the law, the ability to make a sound judgement, or the supposed impartiality of the judiciary.
This is nothing less than state sponsored travesty. Recall the SOB !
Not really.
Unless there was a Constitutional Amendment. Constitutional rights trump “civil rights”.
I think there are some judges out there who need to be disbarred.
I once had hope for this country. Its priorities are up its collective a$$. Murderers don’t get this treatment.
Rape, theft, terrorism and murder gets you apologies and sympathy from the left. If you violate a norm of political correctness you are hunted hounded stripped and impoverished.
So, her "really special" friend sued her and now she will be financially ruined?
There is a lesson in here somewhere...
... (other than a lot of lampposts in Washington really need to be "decorated")...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.