[Valid Atom 1.0]

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Washington State sues florist for refusing to sell flowers for a gay wedding...

Flowers at Andrew Sullivan's Big Fat Gay Wedding
Oh Please, give me a break. The State of Washington does not have any better things to prosecute?  What about reserving the right to refuse service to anyone?  This is not some essential service like denying housing, medical care, or food, but simply a person who opposes gay marriage on religious grounds and declined to participate as a business.  I support gay marriage, but many people do not.  They should have the right to opt out of supporting that (and gays and their supporters should have the right not to support and boycott their businesses in response). That is how free markets work. I understand anti discrimination laws on race, but this is not the same thing. And what gay couple is going to have a hard time finding a florist for their gay marriage?

Via Lonely Conservative
California moves to revoke Boy Scouts tax exempt status over gay scouts... (and Christian church youth groups and guess what, churches will be next).  The sway denim secret police are coming for your uncool niece...
Riehl World View 

Arlene's Flowers, Richland, WA
This particular establishment, Arlene's Flowers, has been in Richland, WA for 47 years (back when they were making plutonium at Hanford).  This is not some hip florist for a fabulous gay wedding, it is a little old lady florist, which makes me wonder if this was a set up from the start?  The Attorney General's office pursued this because of a Facebook post:  "The incident led Ingersoll and Freed to write Facebook posts about it, and that got the attention of the attorney general’s office, as sexual discrimination falls under the state’s consumer protection and anti-discrimination laws."  I am calling BS on this.  Regardless of how you view gay marriage, none of us should want the government interfering like this.  This is a bad precedent.

Read more here: http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2013/04/09/2349489/attorney-general-sues-arlenes.html#storylink=cpy
Go Richland Bombers!  
Bob Scheiffer caught unaware about impact of these gay marriage decisions on those who disagree with participating in it.


  1. What did you think Gay Marriage was All About? Freedom? Love? You are incredibly naive and Stupid.
    Its All About destroying Civilization and Christianity to help bring about the Glorious Revolution where everyone loses their rights and property to a Gang of Thugs!

    1. I am naive and stupid? I recognize there is a big element of gay marriage proponents who want to use this as a wedge to restrict freedom and that is why I did this post to protest what is happening to this florist. She should have the right to opt out of selling to a gay wedding. They have the right to find another florist. This is not a big deal, but you are right, they are trying to make it more than what it is.

      I will resist the efforts of the Statists and Liberal Fascists to destroy civilization, property rights and freedom.

      As far as gay marriage goes, if they pass it through a legislature or through a referendum at state level, I do not oppose it. If you do, fair enough. I am not going to call you names because I disagree with you. I would appreciate it if you did not do it to me.

    2. You need to get a paper bag and breathe into it. You are hyperventilating.

  2. I don't know you so I don't know if you are stupid and naive. But I do think your attitude to this incident is naive.

    Why? Because the law makes no exceptions for the kind of common-sense civility that you would like to see in operation. And this is not the first time this has happened. A Christian photographer in New Mexico wound up with a $6000 fine, to say nothing of lawyers' fees, for declining to shoot a lesbian wedding.

    And is there any reason for you to think that this kind of situation will lessen or become rarer? The anti-discrimination regime is absolute and expansive. It has no internal brake.

    So if you want to confront "liberal fascism", you need to think about this incident in a larger context.

    Private property and freedom of association have ceased to have much meaning against a regulatory regime which leaves you as the tax-paying owner, but more and more dictates to you how you may or must use what you "own."

    Dr Doom may have been intemperate, but he has a serious point.

    1. I am on your side (about the government over reaching). You and Dr. Doom must have a reading comprehension problem if you think I support the fines and harassment by government against people who disagree with gay marriage.

      But here is the bitter reality for you, gay marriage is a fact in a handful of states. Whether you agree with it or not, that is the reality.

      I am not naive. Just becuase something is a law does not make it right. And the State Attorney General (like any prosecutor) does have some discretion on what cases to bring and what laws to enforce. I do not disagree with the points you and Dr. Doom are making. I know that many gay marriage proponents are not acting in good faith. This action by the Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson is an example of that.

      I get you oppose gay marriage. Fair enough. I respect that (even if I disagree). I do not consider that position irrational, or bigotted, or wrong. I just do not have a problem with it (in and of itself). Frankly I wish there was no government involvement in marriage, but since there is I defer to state legislatures and voters to establish what those parameters will be.

      And I agree, we need to push back on this government over reach.

  3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.


I welcome all legitimate comments. Keep it civil. Spam will be deleted. Thanks.