U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-07-2019, 12:10 AM
 
2,880 posts, read 617,505 times
Reputation: 1835

Advertisements

Quote:
According to Fox News, the court ruled that Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene's Flowers, "violated the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) for refusing to make floral arrangements for a gay couple in 2013." Similar to the Masterpiece Cakeshop case, Stutzman did not wish to make a custom arrangement for the wedding, which would have required her to lend her artistic creativity to an event that violated her religious beliefs. She did, however, offer to sell the couple whatever pre-made floral arrangement they wished.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/48135...-who-paul-bois

Only social media are allowed to choose how to run their businesses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-07-2019, 12:34 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
15,011 posts, read 13,350,680 times
Reputation: 4591
IF same sex weddings violate her religious beliefs, then why should it be just fine for any pre-made flower arrangements from her shop be present at a same sex wedding?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 01:05 AM
 
2,880 posts, read 617,505 times
Reputation: 1835
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
IF same sex weddings violate her religious beliefs, then why should it be just fine for any pre-made flower arrangements from her shop be present at a same sex wedding?
Guess she draws a line at using her "artistic ability."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 04:08 AM
 
79,350 posts, read 33,653,273 times
Reputation: 15872
This shows the problem I often have with Supreme Court rulings. They should just make the ruling they know they are going to have to eventually make anyway.

As noted their initial ruling was extremely narrow which means they are going to get the case back again. Quit wasting the countries time and court time and just make a definitive ruling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 05:37 AM
 
4,989 posts, read 2,010,130 times
Reputation: 2257
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
This shows the problem I often have with Supreme Court rulings. They should just make the ruling they know they are going to have to eventually make anyway.

As noted their initial ruling was extremely narrow which means they are going to get the case back again. Quit wasting the countries time and court time and just make a definitive ruling.
This shows another problem you often have...

The ruling is from the Washington state Supreme Court... not the Supreme Court of the United States.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 05:44 AM
Status: "What's 100 minus 48 plus 5?" (set 6 days ago)
 
Location: Posting from my space yacht.
8,073 posts, read 3,165,147 times
Reputation: 14567
To echo the sentiment expressed towards people who object to corporate censorship, why didn't that gay couple just start their own flower shop?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 05:48 AM
 
Location: Pyongjang
5,530 posts, read 2,341,613 times
Reputation: 3722
Liberals will support this, then claim Muslims should be able to discriminate because of their beliefs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 05:58 AM
 
Location: My beloved Bluegrass
14,738 posts, read 10,639,149 times
Reputation: 19923
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
IF same sex weddings violate her religious beliefs, then why should it be just fine for any pre-made flower arrangements from her shop be present at a same sex wedding?
Once something is made it is a product and the person who made it is no longer involved with it, just like a greeting card, a dress, a painting, a car, a....etc. The particulars are not dependent on any new input. Once set upon a shelf and sold what the person purchasing it does with it is strictly their business. When an item is being specifically created for an event the artist is supposed to make decisions about the materials, shape, and scope based on the participants and the event, in other words they become a participatory artist in the event. With the item on the shelf the artist was passively involved in the event.

Once an object is made and placed for sale the artists say in what is done with it is over. Before and while an item is being created the artist is refusing to do certain things, after it is made the the artist/vendor is refusing to sell to certain people. I know the difference seems like a very fine line, but it is there nonetheless.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.Moderator - Arkansas & subforums, Asia, Kentucky & subforums, Military Life, and P&OC
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 06:03 AM
 
79,350 posts, read 33,653,273 times
Reputation: 15872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultor View Post
This shows another problem you often have...

The ruling is from the Washington state Supreme Court... not the Supreme Court of the United States.
"Supreme Court Rulings". It makes no difference where they are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2019, 06:06 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,474 posts, read 20,119,330 times
Reputation: 8389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
To echo the sentiment expressed towards people who object to corporate censorship, why didn't that gay couple just start their own flower shop?
They didn't start their own flower shop for the same reason they didn't simply take their business to any of hundreds of flower shops that would have gladly catered to their same-sex wedding.

The purpose isn't to buy flowers.

The purpose is to force a religious-minded person to violate their conscious or loose their business.

The purpose is to place an unacceptably high price on dissent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top