You fellows mind if I squeeze in between?

Arlene's Flowers is back in court and thus back in the news. WA AG Ferguson is out to crush her and her business as an example to others they shall not oppose the homosexual juggernaut.

"On Friday a court will decide on the preliminary matters for the case of Arlene’s Flowers vs. State of Washington/ACLU. The actual trial is set to begin in 2015. One issue to be decided Friday is whether Attorney General Bob Ferguson can personally sue Arlene’s Flowers owner Barronelle Stutzman.

Unlike many similar cases in court across the country, this one could bankrupt and destroy the long-time Richland business. According to the Family Policy Institute of Washington (FPI), which is assisting in Barronelle Stutzman’s legal fight, what Ferguson has done is unusual. According to the news release last Thursday:

If you buy a car that explodes because of a design defect, you would sue the company that made the car. You would not, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, sue the families who own stock in that car company. One of the primary reasons to create a separate legal entity for a business is to protect the personal assets of the owners from the liabilities of the business. Well, Bob Ferguson apparently thinks this case is exceptional, because he sued both the company (Arlene’s Flowers) and its owner (Barronelle Stutzman).”

Stutzman is one of many business owners who’s being sued across the country because of their stand in favor of traditional marriage. Stutzman refused to provide flowers for a same-sex marriage because of her religious beliefs. Her attorneys are arguing — among other reasons — that her Constitutional rights of expression and freedom of speech do not compel her to endorse a practice that goes against her religious and other freedoms.

One of the reasons business owners usually create the legal framework to separate themselves from their business, is to protect themselves from business-related liability. It keeps them from personally being wiped out if the business faces serious legal or financial issues, such as this. This case, says FPI, could go on for some time, and rack up hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. The ramifications for Stutzman could be significant if she loses, says FPI:

By suing both Arlene’s Flowers and Barronelle Stutzman, Bob Ferguson could not only seize all the company’s assets and bankrupt her business but, if the entire legal bill was not paid by the business assets, he could also go after the Stutzman family as well. He could take her house, her cars, her retirement, even her wedding ring. Will he do that? Who knows. But having the option is the reason he sued her personally as well as her business. Whether this is appropriate is one of the pre-trial issues that is being argued.”

Experts also say depending upon whether this will be allowed when the preliminary hearing takes place next week, it could also affect upcoming similar cases. They say other AG’s, groups or individuals considering similar actions could use this benchmark to add the business owner to the legal proceedings.

The hearing will be held Friday, 1:30pm in Benton County Superior Court in the Benton County Justice Center. At that time, the judge will decide whether to allow Ferguson to go after Stutzman personally as part of the suit. Some supporters of Stutzman say since this is the first such case of it’s kind in Washington state, Ferguson wants to “make an example” of Stutzman, to discourage other businesses from discriminating against same-sex couples when it comes to providing goods and services."

http://newstalk870.am/why-is-wa-attorney...-flowers-owner/

I shall add updates as they are available.

A report on Arlene's Flowers has appeared on an internet news site affiliated with the Heritage Foundation.

"Great-Grandma Florist Could Lose Livelihood for Saying No to This Wedding"

"A florist in Washington state is being sued for adhering to her Christian beliefs in declining to make flower arrangements for one couple’s wedding.

Before the lawsuit, Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, Wash., had employed workers who identify as homosexual and sold floral arrangements to gay and lesbian customers.

One such customer turned out to be one of the men who would sue her for not being willing to be hired for their same-sex wedding.

Unlike businesses that face similar lawsuits for refusing to provide specific wedding-related services to gay and lesbian couples on religious grounds—among them bakers in Oregon and farmers in New York—Stutzman is being sued in both a professional and personal capacity."

[more] http://dailysignal.com/2014/12/28/great-...ing-no-wedding/

There are some nice pictures of Baronelle included in the report, including this one of this miscreant responsible for having the entire Liberal establishment of the state of Washington and its homo subdivision all in a dither.



There was a recent court hearing on this case here which I and a number of Stutzman's supporters attended. On her side there were 2 lawyers. On the other side were what looked like 6 lawyers, plus the two girlie men who are the subject of the suit. A decision on her request to dismiss the suit will be rendered later.

The issue is supporting the sin at issue. Just like you would not knowingly help murder a person, the religious law Christians follow prevent us from supporting sin. So while tuning a piano is not directly and actively supporting a sin, putting the homosexuals names on the cake, decorating it with the same gender statues, etc is directly supporting a religiously prohibited act. Same with photography, etc. Tuning a piano can have many other reasons other then supporting the religious prohibited act.

What is at issue is forcing Christians (not Muslims, etc, tho) to support and sanction the Biblical prohibited acts.

Interesting POV, TM. However, it does not explain how Barronelle was supposed to know they, or anyone else who enters her shop, is a homosexual. I have bought flowers there and I assure you no one questioned my sexual orientation. OTOH, being asked to participate in their same sex "marriage" pretty well makes the matter clear, doesn't it? Moreover it's not your standards which are at question here, but hers.

Anyway that was not my main reason for this post. A decision has been rendered in the recent case mentioned above and it is, except for one minor point, a loss for Barronelle, freedom of conscience, and freedom of association.

"The owner of a Richland flower shop being sued over her refusal to provide services for a same-sex wedding can face claims in her personal capacity, a Benton County Superior Court judge ruled Wednesday.

Barronelle Stutzman and her Arlene’s Flowers are being sued by the state Attorney General’s office and a same-sex couple. Stutzman, a Christian, declined to provide services for the couple’s wedding because of her religious beliefs.

Her attorneys argued the claims against her personally should be dropped, describing them as unprecedented and unjust.

Attorneys for the state and the couple argued Stutzman can be held personally liable under the law.

In a decision Wednesday, Judge Alex Ekstrom ruled that “the clear language of the CPA (Consumer Protection Act) and WLAD (Washington Law Against Discrimination) supports both individual and corporate liability.”

However, he did toss out one of the couple’s claims — that Stutzman aided her business in violating state anti-discrimination law.

Ekstrom also dismissed some of Stutzman’s arguments dealing with the state’s standing to bring its lawsuit.

Ekstrom hasn’t yet ruled on some other summary judgment motions in the case. At this time, trial is set for the spring."

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2015/01/07...p=/99/177/&rh=1

This is the local newspaper and a number of comments following.

Boo to the stooge that resurrected a year old thread. Boooooo....

You could always choose not to read it, Frank.

Quote: Cincinnatus wrote in post #24

---

You could always choose not to read it, Frank.

---

"I read EVERY post here at FPP. That is why I am the most informed member here."

Pity then, isn't it, that with all your great knowledge, you contribute so little that is of any real value on here?

Quote: Cincinnatus wrote in post #26

---

Pity then, isn't it, that with all your great knowledge, you contribute so little that is of any real value on here?

---

"what do you feel is lacking in the quality of my posts?"

Since you asked.

This type of insult is not necessary: Boo to the stooge that resurrected a year old thread

Secondly, if a topic is not of interest to you, that means it is not of interest to...you. So pass over it and forget the snarky, irrelevant comments. Not everything you post is of great or even sometimes of any interest to all; but others, including myself, are courteous and adult enough to acknowledge we are guilty of the same possibility and thus and refrain from comment.

I read EVERY post here at FPP. That is why I am the most informed member here. Yeah, Frank, you bet.

Just a personal request: use less profanity, a lot less. It is a substandard form of expression, to be used very judiciously for greater impact.

That's great advice.

I believe I shall take a page out of your book and ruminate over someones post for over a year until I respond from now on. Reading and rereading the posters comments daily while I craft my rebuttal on a yellow legal pad. Massaging and reworking each sentence so that the wording is just right. Pulling it out of my briefcase whenever possible and passing it around during business meetings to get others opinions on how I can make it more refined. Skipping dinners, vacations and holidays so I can research every word and concept so not only the poster I am responding to is mesmerized, but all posters on the forum are blown away by the pure power of that response. Then after a year and 19 days, give or take an hour, I will dig deep for that long forgotten thread and resurrect it from the dead, knowing full well that all members will be brought to tears with the pure majesty of what will be one of the greatest posts ever posted!

The grand vision of this whole fucking thing has given me deep chills as though I have just touched the hand of GOD!

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #25

---

Quote: Cincinnatus wrote in post #24

---

You could always choose not to read it, Frank.

---

I read EVERY post here at FPP. That is why I am the most informed member here.

---