oops--think I was supposed to put "Rick Casey" as the author. How can we correct that?
I can understand why a Christian printer would refuse to print pro-homosexual literature, or a caterer would refuse to cater a union of butt buddies. Heck, I would never design an explicitly pro-sodomite web site. But landscaping? I don't get it.
If a homosexual couple asked me to design a website to sell office supplies, or televisions, or to promote a flower shop or something, I wouldn't think twice about it.
Landscaping a yard for someone is not participating in their sin, for goodness sake.
Not from me. I'm curious if they treat all sinners this way?
Already posted:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1723571/posts
I do not support them. Their position seems overwrought and dogmatic. They were just asked to do some landscaping work. I do not understand why the clients' lifestyle choices were relevant.
Do they refuse to do work for someone who has divorced?
This said, I believe that they should be free to associate with whomever they want. Refusing to do work for someone is not illegal. But when they make their bigotry public, they should be prepared to suffer social opprobrium.
http://www.garden-guy.com/
You can email him from this website. Yes, we all should support and congratulate him!
If nothing else, there doesn't seem much logic to their refusal to do business with the homosexuals. Rather than make a fairly pointless and counterproductive statement, it would've been much smarter to just take the homosexuals' money and, say, donate it to their church or that group opposed to gay marriage. Instead, the homosexuals will probably just make a point of finding a homosexual landscaper now from the ads in a gay publication perhaps.
One day you will stand before the Almighty to be judged. Was your fornication worth it?
This should be his choice. Just as it should be a homosexual's to not perform work for a heterosexual.
Sexual preference should not be a "protected" class from either side.
Yeah, right. Just like the lesbians a year or two ago who were shocked -- shocked, I tell you! -- that the Knights of Columbus hall was unwilling to host their "marriage" ceremony.
They are a private business and they have the right to choose whom they will work for or not.
Just the same way as a homosexual is free to hire a homosexual gardner, instead of a heterosexual one, if they so choose.
My personal opinion on this is that I don't want to know and I don't care. I want to get the best trades person at the most reasonable price, and vice versa, look for a decent customer.
But I should be free to refuse to work for someone, just because -- i.e. you wouldn't catch me working for Pelosi, Murtha, and so on, and the government has no right to coerce me. Or if a house prominently displays a "Vote for Angelides" sign, I have the right to refuse to work for them.
These are private transactions.
They did nothing wrong. Maybe homosexuals make them uneasy.
Yeah, I BET.
He said he didn't notice, at the bottom of one of the pages, under a photo of the Farbers and their four children, this:We only get the story from the side of the gay couple."The God-ordained institution of marriage is under attack in courts across the nation, and your help is needed.
"Go to: www.nogaymarriage.com to take action."
I suspect the gay guys got found the landscapers specifically because of the nogaymarriage.com link on their web page, and intended to provoke an incident
Of course, he lied when he said this. But that very obvious fact will be completely passed over in all the righteous huffing and puffing the MSM will put out over yet another attempt to make Christians look bad.
I agree with this couple, they have their principles and are staying with them. Good for them.
Maybe pingout tomorrow.
Excellent.
What I can't get past in this story would have to be filed under "YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP": the homosexual partners in this story are actually named "Lord" and
" Lackey" !!!! Hmmmm....I wonder which one's "the Boss"?
I support them 110% and then some. As a past (as in retired) business owner I too reserved the right to and practiced that right to refuse my services to anyone I chose and that's as it should be since I was the one who had his assets and livihood on the line. "No one" has a right to tell me how to spend my time and resources for any reason, especially the government, the working mans worst enemy in "this world".