Sen. Hewitt praised for standing his ground

Advertisement

Whatever happened to, “We reserve the right to refuse service?”

I think the florist in the Tri-Cities who refused to provide flowers for a gay wedding, or any business, has that right.

If Walla Walla and its wine industry are so insecure they feel threatened by Sen. Mike Hewitt’s staff member’s remark, then they have a bigger problem somewhere.

Congrats to Sen. Hewitt for standing his ground. I’m an old-fashioned gal with strong beliefs.

Zonia Dedloff

Starbuck

Advertisement

Comments

sohcammer says...

The far left is always squawking about something, playing the race card, the discrimination card, they have a 52 card deck of crap to play it seems. This is America and last time I checked, if someone doesn't like the way you look, they can refuse you service. Some places will even put it in writing.....Can't count the number of times I've seen a "No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service". Private business has the right to refuse service in the same manner that patrons have the right to choose whom they will support.

Let's not over think this people, or in the case of some, under think it.

Posted 11 May 2013, 11:34 p.m. Suggest removal

namvet60 says...

Tis better to stick with morals and personal traditions than campaign on issues and then change your attitude after being elected as some other representatives that we have!

Posted 12 May 2013, 3:03 p.m. Suggest removal

mytwocents says...

So who is gonna ask me if I am gay or Jewish when I walk in to an establishment? How are you gonna know?? I don't look gay or Jewish,.The only way you'd know is if you ask and I tell the truth.or if I am forced to wear a pink triangle on my shirt.. And if that's what Hewitt is supporting.,then HE HAS SOME REAL PROBLEMS!!!!

Posted 12 May 2013, 10:58 p.m. Suggest removal

PeggyJoy says...

Hewitt seems to have forgotten who he represents! He is suppose to represent everyone, just not a select few at his own choosing. If he cannot do that, then he needs to retire.

Posted 13 May 2013, 8:48 a.m. Suggest removal

barracuda says...

Peggyjoy...
Sometimes people vote for a canadate because the canadates views closly resemble their own...
Even though I did not vote for him, and I dont agreee with his view on this issue, I admire the fact that in spite of political pressure, he stood for his values.

Posted 13 May 2013, 4:36 p.m. Suggest removal

Myinput says...

I agree. Way to go Senator.

Posted 19 May 2013, 9:23 a.m. Suggest removal

dbritton says...

for years we all have seen the signs that read "NO SHIRT NO SHOES NO SEVICE" and it was not questioned, so tell why an owner of a business that sells flowers has lost all her rights to not serve someone, I am not upset with how people live there lives gay straight or other wise Everyone has the right to be happy, but how others live there lives should never affect how others feel about it, what ever happen to freedom of choice, I Totally support the flower shop lady, She does not beleave in Gay Marrage so leave her alone she has that right.

Posted 14 May 2013, 2:14 p.m. Suggest removal

Kevconpat says...

Sorry, She doesn't have that right. She is a public business, open to the public. Her personal beliefs and opinions; (I support 100%), even as I disagree with her stance against the couple who happen to be gay. She needs to leave her religious belief at home, with like minded friends or in the church. In business, the laws are clear no discrimination. One can and does have the right thru religion to not accept anything they want.......
Anyway, She used 'Jesus Christ' as her reason to not sell flowers to the couple; who probably , most likely are Christian and believe in Jesus Christ, too. This is childish. We live in a democracy of laws and in WA. St. she has broken the law.
How hard can this be, really!?

Posted 15 May 2013, 8:07 a.m. Suggest removal

PearlY says...

Kevconpat, she is not a "public business," she is a human being who owns and operates a private business. Private, in the sense that it's hers, not the government's.

If it is against her religion to be open on Sunday, do you contend she doesn't have a RIGHT to close her business on that day?

If it turns her stomach to see people with extreme piercings through various openly displayed body parts, must she serve them while keeping a bucket handy in which to lose her lunch?

If it offends her to be called "chick" or "sweetheart" or some R or X rated version thereof by some of her customers, must she tolerate that?

If it offends her to see someone with a swastika or some vile racial epithet tattooed on his forehead, must she serve him nevertheless?

WHY must someone "leave her religious belief at home" when she owns a private business? What principle of the Constitution or moral reasoning requires that a business owner give up his or her right to free expression and freedom of association to serve customers s/he doesn't want to serve?

The laws are only clear about a very few forms of discrimination by business owners. Most forms are not illegal, and laws are always subject to change. That's what started this whole thing: Sen. Hewitt trying to change the law to protect business owners' rights. Good for him!

Posted 15 May 2013, 4:04 p.m. Suggest removal

Kevconpat says...

We will have to disagree.
I'm a Vet. When I entered service in 1981 I knew from then on...in my heart I would defend all Americans and other citizens if called on to do so. As a civilian citizen for many years, I still live my life in this manner... in that I really try to treat all humans equally. I don't judge on stereotypes, though even I wonder sometimes about someone by their appearance. This is the human part of him relying on past experiences.
I do this every day in my job, assist and help out, never caring what their personal religion might be or sexual orientation is.
I greet everyone in my neighborhood as I work outside on my property projects. For example gardening or currently fence building. I just interact with those who pass by.
I guess we really will just not see eye to eye on this. This story of Arlene's Floral Shop will play out in the press for all to see and in the end everyone will have to go on living their lives.
-Have a nice day.

Posted 16 May 2013, 8:14 a.m. Suggest removal

PearlY says...

Kevconpat, I appreciate your service, and you may be surprised to know that I live my life in exactly the way you describe. I don't care what someone's religion is, as long as they don't try to force it on me, and I don't care what someone's sexual orientation is (unless I'm attracted to him!). I've lived long enough and traveled far enough to know that judging a book by its cover is a poor substitute to getting to know an individual as a person (although the swastika tattoo on the forehead might cause me to make some assumptions about the person).

But here's where we disagree: Although I personally would not turn away a gay customer, I believe I must tolerate others who disagree with me, and not just tolerate them believing differently, but also tolerate them acting on their own beliefs within their own lives.

Arlene chose to open a floral shop. You and I didn't have any right to demand that she do that, and we also don't have any right to tell her whom she must accept as customers just because she chose that life. You are not "defending all Americans" when you insist that Arlene live HER life according to YOUR standards rather than her own.

The irony is that I know you can clearly see that principle when it comes to gay people living their lives as they choose, on which I totally agree with you, but you have blinders on when it comes to beliefs and lifestyles you disapprove of. Toward them, you are proudly intolerant and want to make those differences illegal. Yes, on that we really will not see eye to eye.

Posted 16 May 2013, 2:07 p.m. Suggest removal

JohnnyLaw says...

She is a private business that is open to the public.

Posted 17 May 2013, 1:39 p.m. Suggest removal

Myinput says...

I agree. Leave her alone. It is HER store, not a government store and kudos to her for standing her ground.

Posted 19 May 2013, 9:24 a.m. Suggest removal

owsleyins says...

I have to say.......I wish I could agree with the flower shop lady, but the law is the law and she broke the law. Now, since I would agree with her, she should have handled it differently. If she had told the customer she just did not have the time to provide the flowers because she was booked up, that would have eliminated the need to service the customer. Sometimes a "little white lie" saves a lot of people a lot of trouble, and hurt feelings and in this case, being charged with a criminal act. I agree also, however, that is is not a "public" business...it is a "private business" open to the public and she should be able to refuse service if she wants.....unfortunately the law says she cannot state the reason she used, as it is discriminatory.....so she should have just said she didn't want to do it...period. I don't believe you should have to give a specific reason for not wanting to service a certain person. If you don't want to you should be able to refuse just for that reason....I don't want to! and leave it at that.

Posted 16 May 2013, 2:25 p.m. Suggest removal

Myinput says...

So why tell someone a white lie when you can just tell them the truth. She doesn't believe in gay marriage so why should she - a private business owner- have to make their flowers. I give them KUDOS for standing up for what they believe.

Posted 19 May 2013, 9:27 a.m. Suggest removal

namvet60 says...

If the state of Washington had not gone out of bounds and authorized a vote on an illegal policy against federal laws we wouldn't be having this discussion. Same as the marijuana law.

Posted 17 May 2013, 4:23 p.m. Suggest removal

PearlY says...

Gotta disagree with you there. Regulation of marriage has always been a matter of state law, not federal, and that's exactly where it should stay. Same as marijuana laws. Sometimes I wonder if the last time the feds were justified in sticking their noses into states' business wasn't the Civil War.

Posted 18 May 2013, 6:03 a.m. Suggest removal

namvet60 says...

I do agree but the feds did and passed the law and State law does not supersede Federal laws. Or unless if that has been changed in the dark of night recently?

Posted 19 May 2013, 2:58 p.m. Suggest removal

barracuda says...

It seems other "*public*" business' are able to refuse users/customers based on their personal versions of morality.
.
Check out this link:
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/banks...

Posted 18 May 2013, 1:11 a.m. Suggest removal

namvet60 says...

Great link!

Posted 19 May 2013, 2:59 p.m. Suggest removal

Log in to comment