Arlene’s Flowers Case Headed Back to Washington State Supreme Court



If silly gays weren't obsessed with heterosexual rituals, we wouldn't be having this rise to the SCOTUS. Now, thanks to these twerps, real full-course bigotry could actually be codified against gays in food, lodging, employment, and more.


Look, discrimination in the public/business sector goes both ways, as we're seeing with this administration's officials being kicked out of restaurants. These bigots better be careful what they ask for, because I will discriminate against christians any chance I get. I guess that makes me a bigot too.


The Colorado case contentended that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission showed bias in it's treatment of the baker. That's the only precedent it sets. The onl;yreview needed in the florist case, and any case going forward, is whether the determination of review boards is biased. If the answer is no, the baker case does not apply.


@2: The recent inciident with SHS may look similar to the baker case at first glance, but they are not. Reusing to bake a for a gay person(s) is discriminatory, while not wanting to associate with someone because they are a liar and are a representive of a corrupt, inhumane and unethical adminisistration is not. You have all heard that restaurants can "reserve the right to refuse service." That is true, but if the reason for the refusal is discriminatory, it's illegal. If the baker had said to the gay couple after finding out what they wanted: I don't think I will be able to accomodate you because of time constraints or other client obligations, then he would been fine in the eyes of the law, even if he was really refusing because of prejudice. As long it couldn't be proven. As a 30 year veteran of the food service industry, I've many customers refused service or employees fired for all sorts of bullshit reasons, but the establishment just say some reason that isn't discriminatory.


Like @2, I would love to discriminate against christians. Unfortunately, there's hardly any true christians around it seems. Most of the people claiming to be christians are no more christian than my dog is.


@2 & 4, I feel that the key detail often glanced over in the CO bakery case is that the bakery offered services to the gay couple, but not the customization asked for. The bakery did not withdraw all services. I think that's a nuance that matters.



So if by true Christians you mean the people who are actually compassionate, caring, and non-judgmental, why would you want to discriminate against them?


As aside, the SCOTUS majority really had to scrape dirt for a reason to rule on behalf of bigotry. The law itself is clear-cut, so they side-stepped that by supposing "maybe the baker wasn't treated with kiddie gloves by certain people" and that sounded good enough for the other quacks like Uncle Thomas to get behind. This SCOTUS is weighted with its mind made up - their personal belief will be the law no matter what. There was absolutely zero legal basis behind that decision.


@1 -- yes. They should STFUA and try not to antagonize the Homophobics. You know, those self-professed Jesus-worshippers, who'd rather those different-type people just didn't exist, anymore. Or not within their precious eyesight, leastways.

Shall we require business owners to show political affiliation -- should anti-abortion, anti-marriage equality, or alt-White nationalist extremists be allowed to hide behind a smokescreen of banal business monikers?


A point not yet made is that religion is total made-up horse shit that has no basis in reality. That alone makes the bigot's arguments null and void.


3 is correct. If anyone had read the SCOTUS decision. They didn't rule in favor of the baker. They ruled against the Civil Rights Commission rules. Therefore the the previous rulings against the baker in Col. state were thrown out.


I wouldn't really discriminate against actual christians. I'm really just saying there's not many actual christians.


@12 I call them hypochristians and I would not have a problem holding someone to their own professed beliefs and calling them on their bullshit. The bible is not a bowl of chex mix. You don't get to pick the parts you like and leave the rest.


Any true christian, as I understand it, would be poor, or at least not wealthy because a rich man has as much chance getting into heaven as a camel through the eye of a needle. Given this 'rule', how many christians are there in america?

Or another rule I had heard that that jesus dude preached was let he who has not sinned cast the first stone? Or how about that which you do unto the least of my brethren you do unto me, or something like that..... basically, be good to the poor.

So if we say you have to believe and follow all 3 of the above 'rules', how many true christians are there really in this country?

So, to answer @7's inquiry, I'd say it'd be really easy to not discriminate against the 'real' christians in this country because there aren't any.


“The bible is not a bowl of chex mix. You don't get to pick the parts you like and leave the rest.”

Oh, but @13, I beg to differ – your Religion is whatever you SAY it is.
At that time – or at any time. Beautiful, isn’t it?

Picking and choosing which parts apply to you (or, perhaps most importantly, which Rules you'd prefer see applied to someone else) (there's a hellova lotta joy in Moralizin'!) is solely in the eyes of the beholder, as natural as being a Christian, and never, never ever up to someone else’s need to speculate / authenticate / validate.

I’m a Christian if I say I am.


As far as Sanders getting asked to leave I think it was in the owners right to do so. Different States have different laws. Only three jurisdictions protect against discriminatory refusals of service based on political affiliation or opinion. Washington, D.C., Seattle and the Virgin Islands.


Obviously, there are MANY Good Christians.
But one doesn't hear about them often enough.

For instance: Are they standing up to the serially-divorced Pussygrabber-in-Chief?
Is there a 'Christian Movement For Restoring Decency to the White House,' yet?
Jesus, what's it gonna take?



"Jesus, what's it gonna take"?

so far as I can tell - Jesus, literally...


@6: Stutzman didn't refuse all service to this couple, either. She had been selling them flowers for years, just not wedding flowers.


Everybody who believes that Sarah Sanders should have been kicked out of the Virginia restaurant should be supporting florists and bakers who deny service to gay people. It appears to be the American way as you define it.


If only these flower shops had, instead of refusing to serve the customers, had instead heckled and hounded them out of their shop, they would have been A-OK according to June 2018 liberal standards.


All's they gotta do, Sporty, is krank up the FOX.
Like the stench of a hog farm,
it's usually enough to keep the segacious away.


Oops -- make that /\ /\ /\ sagacious