Wash. florist sues state in gay wedding case

Wash. florist sues state in gay wedding case

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021001123_apwagayweddinglawsuit2ndldwritethru.html

... and she thinks this lawsuit is likely to succeed?

So the argument is over whether a person can refuse service based on their religious beliefs.

I can sort of see why someone would think they could, as in this instance, not sell to a gay person because their religion tells them gay = bad, but religion doesn't always trump everything else. I mean, you can't use religion to avoid paying taxes (unless your 'business' is a church) so we know religion stops at some point where it meets the law.

It makes sense to let businesses have reasonable amounts of freedom in who they'll serve, but that should be on the basis of health and safety and stuff like that. There's no danger in selling to a gay person. I think their case is without merit. I mean, are we going to then say it's okay to refuse service to someone of a different religion, a different race? How far would someone push the law back in the name of their religion?

Can you provide a bit of a summary in your topic post next time instead of just a link? I shouldn't have to visit their site to know what you're talking about.

This is interesting because anti-discriminatory laws are coming into conflict with religious beliefs. I think in the end, the former will win out over the latter, as other people who have claimed they commit crimes in the name of their religious beliefs have still been convicted.

I initially thought they shouldn't be forced to service someone they didn't want to at their private business, but then I thought back on private businesses a few decades ago that refused service to blacks. I guess it makes sense from an anti-discriminatory perspective.

Small business shouldn't have to hire people they don't like, because in that kind of environment you going to be seeing a lot of each other - and if you don't like each other, this isn't going to be a good experience for either party. But, large business, and the environment that tends to foster, should hire anyone who is qualified.

But, that's hiring practices. Different from this, where you're selling. And if you're in business, you should be selling to everything that moves. You're in business to make money. You shouldn't care who you're selling to unless you suspect some sort of security/personal safety risk of some sort.

So, lose the flower shop. Sell it to someone who wants to make money.

TRIFORCE89 said:

Small business shouldn't have to hire people they don't like, because in that kind of environment you going to be seeing a lot of each other - and if you don't like each other, this isn't going to be a good experience for either party. But, large business, and the environment that tends to foster, should hire anyone who is qualified.

But, that's hiring practices. Different from this, where you're selling. And if you're in business, you should be selling to everything that moves. You're in business to make money. You shouldn't care who you're selling to unless you suspect some sort of security/personal safety risk of some sort.

So, lose the flower shop. Sell it to someone who wants to make money.

Click to expand...

I agree with you... mostly. No one should be forced to hire someone that they don't want to hire.

I don't see why someone would want to buy flowers from a company that doesn't like them. Perhaps they just want attention.

FreakyLocz14 said:

I don't see why someone would want to buy flowers from a company that doesn't like them. Perhaps they just want attention.

Click to expand...

If you go in legitimately seeking service not aware beforehand that they won't cater to you and your business is turned down on a discriminatory basis, where would be the attention seeking aspect in that?

You should bring you business elsewhere because you can't force them to deal with you, and, at least to me, you wouldn't want to give them your money. Speak with you wallet.

Suing could be seen as trying to make a point I guess, but I wouldn't fault them.

Not only can anyone deny service to those they don't wish to serve, it is also her religious right.
I personally think she's a bigot. I wouldn't deny a Christian service even though I don't like their religion, cause business is business. That gay couple isn't forcing her to accept homosexuality by making them a flower arrangement. However, you can't argue with her rights. She shouldn't have to accept anyone she doesn't want to.

Miss Anne Thrope said:

Not only can anyone deny service to those they don't wish to serve, it is also her religious right.
I personally think she's a bigot. I wouldn't deny a Christian service even though I don't like their religion, cause business is business. That gay couple isn't forcing her to accept homosexuality by making them a flower arrangement. However, you can't argue with her rights. She shouldn't have to accept anyone she doesn't want to.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but the law disagrees with you. Anti-discrimination laws (particularly in this state) prohibit any business serving the public from refusing service based on religion, sex, disability, sexual orientation, race, and other characteristics.

You can't do as you suggest.