Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Please post a link to this claim, as I have never heard of a florist staying to "assist the wedding party".
"Name of the florist who will be on hand during the wedding (your florist will contact you prior to the wedding if this needs to change). Some florists, if they're playing the role of stylist or planner, will stay for the entire event. If they're simply providing decor, they'll likely stay for setup and any room changes, and then once the reception is decorated, they'll leave. "
"Name of the florist who will be on hand during the wedding (your florist will contact you prior to the wedding if this needs to change). Some florists, if they're playing the role of stylist or planner, will stay for the entire event. If they're simply providing decor, they'll likely stay for setup and any room changes, and then once the reception is decorated, they'll leave. "
The claim was that the florist being discussed said that SHE said that she does this for every wedding, so she would have to attend the wedding.
This is a general article about florists, there is no quote from the florist in this case.
I didn't know that's what she said. I know from the depositions that the men had no intentions of her doing anything like that, but she never let the conversation reach that point.
I didn't know that's what she said. I know from the depositions that the men had no intentions of her doing anything like that, but she never let the conversation reach that point.
Yep. She was never asked to attend, or set up, or assist the wedding party, or do anything but do some arrangements. The wedding was in their home, so I doubt there were that many flowers to begin with. I can't see why she would need to be there to assist the wedding party, or move arrangements, or rearrange the flowers. All the couple wanted was some "twigs in a vase" which they were going to add candles to, and some boutonnieres.
Yep. She was never asked to attend, or set up, or assist the wedding party, or do anything but do some arrangements. The wedding was in their home, so I doubt there were that many flowers to begin with. I can't see why she would need to be there to assist the wedding party, or move arrangements, or rearrange the flowers. All the couple wanted was some "twigs in a vase" which they were going to add candles to, and some boutonnieres.
And no one has claimed she was "asked" to attend. Her serves INCLUDE delivering the flowers to the venue, staying during the ceremony and assisting the wedding party. Engaging her services implies that you are entitled to the included services without asking.
Right there. All quotes are taken directly from her deposition. You are under oath when giving deposition.
And where in her deposition testimony does she outline the services she provides to customers who engage her services to provide wedding flowers. I don't see that in the document you linked to. The only way she can contradict her sworn testimony is to list her services and omit what she stated in the link from the Washington Times I posted previously.
It's a difficult situation. I'm personally ambivalent about gay marriage. But if I owned a florist business in a state where gay marriage was legal and a gay couple wanted flowers for their wedding; I think I would have to follow the law of the land and provide them with flowers. I believe that's part of being a business owner; you might sometimes have to deal with people you may not like or agree with.
Well she has been dealing with the one gay guy for at least 10 years. If she was so offended she shouldn't have taken his money all these years.
This isn't a case of a radical gay couple who sought out the most conservative religious business owner they never met before to stir the pot.
Tyranny and terrorizing the minority has to do with majority versus minority and what our forefathers spoke about it, not the First Amendment. I stated that fairly clearly.
Tyranny is defined as oppressive power exerted by the government.
And where in her deposition testimony does she outline the services she provides to customers who engage her services to provide wedding flowers. I don't see that in the document you linked to. The only way she can contradict her sworn testimony is to list her services and omit what she stated in the link from the Washington Times I posted previously.
What post was that link in again?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
