Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/10/2013 12:27:44 PM PDT by Mount Athos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: Mount Athos

Sue a business than won’t sell flowers to a couple of nut-cases, but let how many thousands of illegal aliens run free, unhindered, by US and State laws? Attack normal businesses, but let nut cases run wild, and foreign criminals do as they please.


42 posted on 04/10/2013 1:08:27 PM PDT by Neoliberalnot (Marxism works well only with the uneducated and the unarmed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos

do you really believe this would be playing out identically if the flower shop owner was a muslim?


43 posted on 04/10/2013 1:11:37 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos

I think that at least some argument can be made about the statute:

“Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers based on sexual orientation.”

The state of Washington does not have the authority to prevent discrimination on the basis of religion. For this reason, retailers can limit their service to couples “married in accordance with Orthodox religious marriage”, excluding those religious *denominations* that permit other forms of marriage, as well as refusing service to those with just secular marriages.

That is, my religion does not have to recognize the legitimacy of their religious beliefs, or lack thereof. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with it.


46 posted on 04/10/2013 1:14:35 PM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos

The florist didn’t discriminate against the customer. They didn’t refuse them service or treat them any different from normal people. The florist simply refused to be a party to a ceremony that violated their firmly held religious beliefs.


50 posted on 04/10/2013 1:23:13 PM PDT by BykrBayb (Somewhere, my flower is there. ~ Þ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos
“As Attorney General, it is my job to enforce the laws of the state of Washington,” said Ferguson. “Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers based on sexual orientation.

Isn't the Consumer Protection Act a federal law? If so, the AG has contradicted himself.

53 posted on 04/10/2013 1:27:12 PM PDT by matt1234
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos

Gubmint jackboots on our throats.

Pack up the shop and move elsewhere.


55 posted on 04/10/2013 1:36:05 PM PDT by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos
“Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers based on sexual orientation. If a business provides a product or service to opposite-sex couples for their weddings, then it must provide same sex couples the same product or service.”

I would think that they aren't "customers" until contracts are signed and money changes hands.

Aren't these discrimination laws meant to keep businesses from charging a different price for minorities, or giving lesser quality products for the same price, not say who is or isn't a "customer?"

By their reasoning, can I make a home movie and then go to my local theater and demand that they show it, because I'm a "customer" and they show other people's movies so the have to show mine, too?

Is that how it works now?

-PJ

57 posted on 04/10/2013 1:40:12 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos
1. Tolerance is a one-way street. The gay lobby has no tolerance for those who refuse to pretend that perverts are exactly like decent people.

2. A florist can either fight this sort of thuggery and compulsion (which I greatly admire) or respond in a passive-aggressive manner. "Of course I'd be willing to do your flowers. Pick an arrangement . . . oh, that's a nice one! Those will be $4,000 . . . each" (or in general ten to twenty times the going rate). All the personal services that the gay mafia demand are priced individually, and it would be quite effective (for those who lack the time, money, courage, and energy to fight) if decent Americans would pretend to bow to the far left's demands while through their actions driving unwanted customers elsewhere.

3. As for photographers, they can quote their standard fee for that sort of thing: perhaps $800 per hour, plus $60 per photo for each picture the happy couple chooses to keep. I'm sure the perverts would decide to go elsewhere but not sue, and they would have no standing to sue in any case. "Oh, no, the lighting is dreadful there, I've never had any luck with that setting. That's my going rate for afternoon weddings at that venue in April because I've always found it to be so much work and frustration for someone with my artistic style to try to shoot a ceremony in that lighting."

58 posted on 04/10/2013 1:40:52 PM PDT by Pollster1 (A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos

What happened to the signs I used to see:

We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone!......


64 posted on 04/10/2013 1:48:28 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos

freedom of association ring a bell?


67 posted on 04/10/2013 1:54:15 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos; All
I think that all this fuss is due to a combination of liberal indoctrination of the "Constitution" in law schools in conjunction with the nation's schools not teaching the Constitution as lawmakers had intended for it to be understood.

In a nutshell, religious expression is expressly protected by 1A, while refusal of service on basis of sex is not constitutionally protected. And express constitutional protections trump non-enumerated protections regardless what state laws say.

Also, while misguided liberals argue that sex equality is protected by the Equal Protections Clause of Sec. 1 of 14A, if they would bother to read Sec. 2 of 14A then they would find that Sec. 2 discriminates on basis of sex, age and citizenship regardless of Equal Protections Clause.

74 posted on 04/10/2013 3:45:36 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mount Athos

I’d say it’s time for 10,000 good conservative citizens to occupy the neo-Nazi office of State Attorney General Bob Ferguson and prevent his Hitler operation from going forward.


79 posted on 04/10/2013 5:13:17 PM PDT by sergeantdave (No, I don't have links for everything I post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson