Originally posted at TexasKaos.com
Update is at end.
A small Houston landscaping company is in the news big time for refusing service to a gay couple because the religous conservatives won't work with homosexuals.
Michael Lord and Gary Lackey, a gay couple requesting bids for a landscaping job at their new house, received a polite ? and, well, honest ? e-mail from Sabrina Farber, a co-owner of Garden Guy: "I need to tell you that we cannot meet with you because we choose not to work for homosexuals."
The Farbers have gotten tons of hate emails at their company site, but claim they have also gotten alot of support.
"We become accidental crusaders for Christ," said Mrs. Farber.
The Farbers have also gotten lots of hate mail, making them claim, "The crowd of tolerance and diversity is not so tolerant."
Mrs. Farber, I apologize, but you're full of crap. Not only are you using the Lord's name in vain, but you also may not legally discriminate against people.
I'm sick of Christian Conservatives using their religion to defend their narrow-mindedness and bigotry.
Christ did not preach hate and did not preach discrimination. I do acknowledge that there are passages which -if you choose - can be interpretted as condemning homosexual acts. But if you are being literal, then you must also believe that it's just to commit incest, murder siblings, and impregnant your servants - among many acts done in the Bible.
To use the Bible and Christ to support your bigotry is vanity and - well, using the Lord's name in vain.
The Farbers hide behind their mega-church, brain-washed, Bible-thumping beliefs and expect people to back off because its "our religion"!
And I would - IF you had kept it private. However, the minute you decided to open a company and engage in the act of commerce, you came under the jurisdiction of legal and social laws.
Legally, I don't believe you can discriminate against this couple. I know Houston does not have an ordinance prohibiting discrimination.
However, do we really need to include every damn form of discrimination before we call it discrimination??
Mrs. Farber's defense of her bigotry is very weak IMHO.
It was just our intent to uphold our rights as small business owners to choose our clientele,? she said.
That's exactly the same thing diners and restaurants said in the 60s to keep blacks and minorities out.
Think about it. If you allow people to discriminate against one group, how can you stop them from discriminating against another?
The minute you started engaging with the public in commerce, you accepted the laws of society and the spirit of the laws governing commerce.
That means you can't discriminate against anybody just because they look different from you, believe differently from you, came from a different country than you, or - in this case - love in a different way.
Mrs. Farber, you are not serving Christ when you preach bigotry and you are certainly not abidding by the laws of society.
This should be persued legally. If Houston doesn't have a law (and it doesn't but SHOULD), then there's gotta be SOME law that covers this.
Say, oh, I don't know, the CONSTITUTION? I know it's been forgotten these last few years.
Maybe with the election we can dust it off and apply it again.
----------------------------------------------------
Update:
Guys, I've heard several of you say that businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone, and I must say I'm shocked at that belief.
First, it's ok to be a bigot (legally). I'm not attacking free speech. Speech is free - but not commerce.
The Farbars were fine to be bigots - UP TO THE POINT where they brought that belief into the public domain. At which point, there are degrees of freedom.
For instance, they can tell gays or Latinos they are going to hell b/c they are gay or Latino. But if they follow people around screaming this, then they are harrassing people - and that can be illegal.
They could piss on gay porn in their living room & that'd be fine (tho alarming). If they did on their front lawn in public, then they would arrested.
So, case by case, their speech CAN be limited based on their use of that speech (but not what they speak).
SECONDLY, I believe you're wrong to believe Business has private rights. Business - the act of engaging in commerce - is a public domain activity. You are egaging with the public, whether it's your neighbor or the general community, and therefore you are governed by the laws of society.
I think that's a fundamental mistake some of you are making. I mean if the IRS can tax anything you sell or profit from and the IRS can only tax public commerce, doesn't that say it's a public domain issue?
Speech again is free - but business is NOT an ungoverned act.
I must say i'm very surprised by the idea that so many progressives consider this act LEGAL.
Ask yourself a simply question:
IF YOU OWNED A RESTAURANT AND A BLACK COUPLE WALKED IN AND YOU KICKED THEM OUT B/C OF THE COLOR OF THEIR SKIN, ARE YOU WITHIN YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS?
I'm honestly shocked by the number of times i'm hearing that is essentially ok.
I'm not scolding anyone so please don't be defensive or offended. Please just consider that question & the idea that public commerce is NOT a private activity.