WA Florist: 'I Will Not Be Like Judas, Betray Jesus for Money'
After a judge ruled last week that Washington florist and Christian grandmother Barronelle Stutzman violated the law when she refused to provide arrangements for a same-sex wedding, Stutzman rejected a tempting settlement offer that would have spared her from losing her home and business, because it would have forced her to turn her back on God.
As Stutzman was found guilty of violating Washington's non-discrimination law last Wednesday for declining to service the wedding of Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed in 2013 due to her Christian belief of marriage, Stutzman runs the risk of losing not only her business but her house and life savings once a summary judgement is reached.
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson offered the 70-year-old Stutzman, the owner of Arlene's flowers, a settlement on Thursday that would have spared Stutzman the high, bankrupting legal costs that she could incur as a...
G'day John Yurich from USA, I am sorry if I offended you last week, It was not my intention. My only motivation was and still is that the questions I posed I hoped will stir your spirit to action and That you receive understanding from the Holy Spirit. God bless. My sin of anger, swearing is also filth to the Lord. We all fall short of the glory off God. Again Good Bless.
Penny,you don't know nor can you know that she is a Christian. We may have an idea by their fruit but all you know of this woman, and all that I know, is that she professes Christianity and her great contribution to the "cause" is not being a "Judas" in this specific case. Not everyone who says that they're a Christian and takes a public stand against fundamental issues is necessarily the real deal. Roman Catholics take issue with abortion,for example. Again,it is not an issue of not serving sinners period. It is an issue of withholding services from those based on a fair standard. "Yes",it would be wrong to serve a couple that is about to wed who got together because of adultery.It's not an issue of whether or not anyone ever committed adultery but whether or not they are presently in that sin. This is just how far we are removed from God's standard. We don't even recognize the double standard and we accept the sexually sinful heteros' activities. The world condones them and so do we. But when it comes to the homos,then we are all pious. And I am not holding myself above. For all I know,she is sincere. I had addressed that earlier.I was speaking to consistency and what constitutes hypocrisy.
John UK wrote: It's like I said, sc. If it were not for sinners, no-one would make a dime. LTRU
Okay pilgrim, I agree with your thoughts, but what does LTRU stand for
As for this lady. I don't care if she is a Christian or not regarding what she did and said, but unless someone can come up with something about her theology we are stuck with the facts given. According to the link, she is doing what her conscience is telling her to do which is what we should all do. The only thing that made me really ponder is whether or not I would be willing to give up all to obey the Lord.
if you are speaking to me, you can call me Penny or something of the sort, by addressing me as a human being.
how do I know she's a Christian?
because she has taken her hour of persecution and associated herself with the name of Christ and loved her neighbor...
same as the Christian families in Syria and Iraq having jihadists come in their homes and tell their children to deny Christ, and they do not.
If you want to run a business and ask people if they've ever committed adultery, that's fine with me. It would sound odd, because all have sinned. The difference is that you would be celebrating the adulterous marriage in this case. I would bet ya there's been lots of Godly older women and men who have run shops before in local towns that told a younger fellow that they were in sin and could not celebrate with them. difference? they didn't go running to mommy lawyer to make them feel better.
seems to me, if a brother or sister is being persecuted you stand by them. you seem quite swift to separate yourself and hold yourself above her spiritually for no cause, the spirit of the age can come in many forms, even look like a form of righteousness.
I meant context of the sentence. And you assume way too much. Neither you nor I know that this is a kind lady just because she says that she is a Christian and doesn't care to be a Judas. I was specifically speaking of sexual sins. I still think that if you take issue with homosexuality that you should,likewise,take issue with hetero adultery. Just because one is less obvious doesn't discount the notion that one would still be supporting a displeasing union if adulterers are married. So,if you're a Christian business owner make it very clear to those who come in that you will only serve those who do not counter your convictions. "Yes", that means that you would ask them whether or not they are engaged in adultery. What's wrong with that? Of course,one might lose some business but,at least,they wouldn't have to run the risk of being,as the kind lady says,a "Judas".
s c wrote: It wouldn't sound that way if you put things into context. CONTEXT.
the context is a sinful world, and if I waited until I could deal with all sin at once before I did anything, I think I would quite feel like the Greek god Atlas, carrying the world upon my shoulders. Anyone who loves Christ will encounter sin, people will curse, they will have unthankful hearts, and turn to entertainment and their hearts will grow cold and serve themselves, "eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we...". you see? I know the world is corrupt. times that the world brings me a litmus test of depravity that I cannot participate and cannot acknowledge. That day has come and has begun. the kind lady is just the beginning. If whiny reprobates want to stop all forms of buying and selling unless Christians give homage to their confusion to somehow placate their consciences, I might remind them this has all been foretold in scripture. All people are born with this nature to self deceive, its no surprise and I hold no anger towards them, except it should be known their wicked ways do not resolve the abuse of the young but rather promote it. So as far as I'm concerned, since purification has begun, I'll support the brethren in their day of trial.
dear sc I am sure you realize that Christian business people are not the moral police. EVERYBODY that walks into their store for business has issues with sin in their lives, no exceptions. Just because they serve those customers does not make them party to or condoning of their sinful behaviors. This is NOT the issue.
The florist would have turned down someone wanting flowers to celebrate their goal of having a thousand pornographic pictures on their computer. The florist would have turned down siblings wanting an arrangement to celebrate their incestuous relationship. The florist would have turned down the person celebrating rape and would not have given flowers for a 50 shades of grey party. The florist would not have given flowers to celebrate a cursing party. The florist would have turned down making arrangements for a Satanist get together.
The thing is she doesn't get those type of requests. (although I could see the Satanist one) The article specifically states that the "gay" person advised her the arrangement was to celebrate his "gay" marriage. She took a stand against it, we are thankful for her courage.
We don't know how many others she may have turned down for various reasons because they didn't bring a lawsuit or make it public.
pen...stated"...it almost sounds to me that you really just agree with the religious rainbow zealots..." It wouldn't sound that way if you put things into context. CONTEXT. I'm not a rainbow zealot.Do you not have a problem with hetero sins?
Im curious as to how they are to know if the customer is engaging in adultery? Are they to have the customer fill out a questionaire, and if they meet a certain criteria the services will be carried out? This isnt practical. Im all for standing for holiness, but this line of thinking would make a pharisee proud. Unless youve never commited adultery, how could you refuse services on that basis? Like unprofitable servant pointed out, the adulterer is not asking for flowes honoring adultery whereas the sodomite is asking for flowers that honor their blasphemous union. So its not really the same issue.
I dont think Ill disuade you, but thats my opinion. I hope I didnt come off rude cause I didnt mean it that way.
sc, if one gives flowers for Valentine's Day it is because they are trying to honor the recipient. If I send flowers to someone's funeral, again the idea is to honor them. Flowers are a way to commemorate the occasion, to say this is a special day or you are a special person.
The article stated that the "gay" man specifically asked for floral arrangements for his "gay" wedding. She decided to take a stand regardless of the cost. I can imagine if someone walked into the florist and said, "I would like flowers to celebrate adultery with my adulterous partner", she would have also refused.
If your problem was indeed against the double standard, propaganda and spiritual grandstanding then the burden is with you to prove that this is true of this florist. The fact that she sold flowers to this customer for 9 years shows she is not promoting a double standard, she is simply refusing to honor "gay" marriage. I guarantee she wanted none of the publicity or problems she is now facing for taking a stand. She followed her convictions at a great cost to her.
The Corinthians dropped the ball in I Corinthians 5, please read II Corinthians 7:8-16.
Finally, if a person has anger issues does that mean they aren't in a position to reject malice or murder?
I was suggesting that Christian business owners need to drop double standards if they have them.In doing so,they wouldn't appear as being unfair."Yes",they should question the heterosexual couples that want their services insofar as whether or not they are in an adulterous affair...if they are so concerned about contributing to that which God would be displeased.Then there are no double standards. And Mike,I'm not saying that Christians say that it's okay. The fact remains,as long as they don't have to participate in the wedding,how are they "honoring" it by selling a cake or flowers? There should be a standard across the board or they should cater to homosexuals as well. My problem with all of this is the double standard and the propaganda and spiritual grandstanding that goes along with it. This country aborts how many babies a year? There are more critical issues at hand. We dropped the ball a long time ago as far as contending for sexual decency.We're only in a position to reject homosexuality if we also reject heterosexuality in its lewdness. Perhaps this lady is consistent in that regard.I hope so then she is completely just in her stand.
s c wrote: Mike,if the homosexuals are not "married in God's sight" then why do Christians get in an uproar if they want to get "married"? The florist or baker is just selling a product/providing a service. The cake and/or flowers do not "honor" any wedding. ---
Culture redefines marriage, and Christians should go along and bobblehead the idea by providing for a redefined ceremony? It's just flowers, after all. Cultural postmodernism creeps into the body, leads Christians to say it's ok, because other things aren't ok. And they don't even see it. Sad.