 
     |
| Landscaper Under Fire for Refusing to Work for Gays (Page 1/65) |
|
blackrams
|
NOV 11, 03:14 PM
|
|
Landscaper Under Fire for Refusing to Work for Gays
By MONICA RHOR, AP
HOUSTON (Nov. 10) - A few short weeks ago, Garden Guy was just a mom-and-pop landscaping business that promoted itself as "making Houston beautiful since 1991" and promised to treat its customers with respect and honesty. Since then, though, the business has been vilified around the world as a bunch of bigots because its Christian conservative owners refused to do work for a gay couple. 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."
Stunned, Lackey forwarded the e-mail to 200 friends, asking them not to patronize Garden Guy and urging them to pass the word on to friends and family. "I'm still shocked by the ignorance that exists in today's society," Lackey said in his e-mail. And word was indeed passed on - as fast as the Web could carry it. Within days, the e-mail had been forwarded to thousands of people around the world, and quickly became the subject of heated and often ugly debates on the Internet. Because of the furor, a professional association of landscapers created a nondiscrimination policy.
A forum on the Garden Guy Web site, normally reserved for discussions about landscaping and shrubbery, was bombarded with angry comments and venomous attacks from as far away as Australia. Some people attacked the Farbers' beliefs, threatened the couple and their five children, and said they ought to be sodomized. Others condemned gays as sinners headed toward damnation. Farber, whose company's Web site has long included Biblical quotes and a link to a Web site that opposes gay marriage, said she was shocked by the reaction.
"It was just our intent to uphold our rights as small business owners to choose our clientele," she said. "All the hate, the threats of sodomizing my children, the threats of me being murdered, came out because of a very businesslike straightforward e-mail I sent. The crowd of tolerance and diversity is not so tolerant."
But Farber said she and her husband have also gotten hundreds of calls and messages offering encouragement and have been touched by that. "We just cried. We have been through so much," Farber said. "We become accidental crusaders for Christ." Lackey and Lord did not return calls from the Associated Press.
"Imagine if it had been a black or Hispanic couple that they wouldn't provide services to. It's really bad," said Jack Valinski, a Houston gay activist. "A lot of gay couples have kids, live in the suburbs and have neighbors that are straight. Yet, we still have instances like this. There is still always that underlying discrimination we all have to deal with." Houston, unlike Austin and Dallas, has no ordinance prohibiting businesses from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
Farber's e-mail reached the Harrisburg, Pa., offices of the Association of Professional Landscape Designers, which said that the Farbers were misrepresenting themselves as current members of the group and no longer belong. After receiving hundreds of outraged calls and e-mails, the 1,200-member association issued a statement criticizing the Farbers and created a nondiscrimination policy. "It has come to our attention that a former member has declined a professional engagement on the grounds of the prospective clients' sexual orientation. This conduct does not conform to the policy and practice of APLD," the organization said.
Gonna have to watch this one, I personally think they have a right to serve or not serve based on their religious beliefs but, I'm sure some folks will want to add sexual orientation to the legal description of discrimination.
------------------
Ron
Land of the Free because of the Brave. Most gave some, some gave all.
My imagination is the only limiting factor to my Fiero. Well, there is that money issue.[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 11-11-2006).]
|
|
|
fierobear
|
NOV 11, 04:44 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Gonna have to watch this one, I personally think they have a right to serve or not serve based on their religious beliefs but, I'm sure some folks will want to add sexual orientation to the legal description of discrimination.
|
|
Now that Democrats are in power, you can count on this poor guy getting his ass kicked in court, probably will lose his business. I guess we don't have a choice who we associate with anymore.
|
|
|
|
cliffw
|
NOV 11, 04:58 PM
|
|
| quote | [Bfrom article[/B]
"It has come to our attention that a former member has declined a professional engagement on the grounds of the prospective clients' sexual orientation. This conduct does not conform to the policy and practice of APLD," the organization said.
|
|
I guess the APLD is bound by policy to provide services to pediophiles.
|
|
|
madcurl
|
NOV 11, 04:58 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Landscaper Under Fire for Refusing to Work for Gays
By MONICA RHOR, AP
Some people attacked the Farbers' beliefs, threatened the couple and their five children, and said they ought to be sodomized. |
|
I guess that's another way of saying, "I'm sticking it to ya" hehe. Let's see how the Farbers are gonna back out of this mess?
|
|
|
|
Scott-Wa
|
NOV 11, 05:09 PM
|
|
Idiots the world round... gee, people saying nasty things on the internet? When did that start? Anyone here read the comments to videos on youtube?
As to not working for homosexuals... wtf... is their money a different color? Are they contagious? Are the plants gay? What does who they choose to live/sleep with have to do with getting their lawn mowed and plants trimmed?
What criteria next? The church they do or do not attend? Job they hold? Type of pie they eat?
And the pedophile comment made above was just completely ignorant.
|
|
|
Boondawg
|
NOV 11, 05:17 PM
|
|
He should have just said, "I will not do buisness with you becouse it is my right to choose who I do buisness with."
You are just asking for trouble when you give a reason why you don't like someone.
Ask yourself this:
Why did he feel it nessisary to include the word "Homosexual"?
Becouse he wanted them to be aware of his beliefs.
Why was that nessisary?
A simple, "No thank you." would have worked just fine.
In that light, he was discriminating, and giving the reason why.
He wanted to hurt them, and he wanted them to know why.
It would be the same if Safeway would not sell food to gays.
I believe you have a right to do buisness with whoever you want.
Just don't be foolish enough to give the reason!
"Becouse I have that right" is good enough.
Anything else is just shoving your dislikes down someone else's throat.
He refused service to someone becouse he didn't like the way they were (leaglly) living thier life.
Not smart.
If he felt he MUST include a statement in his denial of service, he should have said, "I will not work for you becouse I don't like you."
Not liking someone is still accepted, I think.
It's just when you make the reasons known, that it can get a little touchy.[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 11-11-2006).]
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
NOV 11, 05:20 PM
|
|
Scott,
In reply to your post, IMO, if a business chooses to not do business with a group such as Fiero owners, then that's there choice. They are the ones making the decision to not serve or sell their product. The decision hits their bottom line. Why they make that decision is their business. Is it discrimination? Sure. But it's their decision to make. At least until some politician puts new legislation forward to add that group to the current anti-descrimination rules. The lady that responded via email was being honest, I guess they could have gone ahead and given the quote and doubled the price so that they wouldn't be selected for the work.------------------
Ron
Land of the Free because of the Brave. Most gave some, some gave all.
My imagination is the only limiting factor to my Fiero. Well, there is that money issue.
|
|
|
|
jstricker
|
NOV 11, 05:34 PM
|
|
Whether you agree with their decision to work for homosexuals or not, I thought you were for INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and shouldn't someone have the RIGHT to work for whoever they want to work for (or not work for)? Isn't that what a Libertarian is all about?
John Stricker
| quote | Originally posted by Scott-Wa:
Idiots the world round... gee, people saying nasty things on the internet? When did that start? Anyone here read the comments to videos on youtube?
As to not working for homosexuals... wtf... is their money a different color? Are they contagious? Are the plants gay? What does who they choose to live/sleep with have to do with getting their lawn mowed and plants trimmed?
What criteria next? The church they do or do not attend? Job they hold? Type of pie they eat?
And the pedophile comment made above was just completely ignorant. |
|
[This message has been edited by jstricker (edited 11-11-2006).]
|
|
|
|
jstricker
|
NOV 11, 05:38 PM
|
|
So, we can only make our own individual choices if we LIE about why we make them? You assume too much. I have made the same decision. I don't care who knows about MY beliefs but MY hard earned money WILL NOT go to support a life style I believe to be wrong. Period. End of story. I will not lie about it either. That's like firing someone for some made up cause, and I won't do that.
To me it's more telling about the apologists saying "oh, just lie, don't tell them what you really think". Screw that.
John Stricker
| quote | Originally posted by Boondawg:
He should have just said, "I will not do buisness with you becouse it is my right to choose who I do buisness with."
You are just asking for trouble when you give a reason why you don't like someone.
Ask yourself this:
Why did he feel it nessisary to include the word "Homosexual"?
Becouse he wanted them to be aware of his beliefs.
Why was that nessisary?
A simple, "No thank you." would have worked just fine.
In that light, he was discriminating, and giving the reason why.
He wanted to hurt them, and he wanted them to know why.
It would be the same if Safeway would not sell food to gays.
I believe you have a right to do buisness with whoever you want.
Just don't be foolish enough to give the reason!
"Becouse I have that right" is good enough.
Anything else is just shoving your dislikes down someone else's throat.
He refused service to someone becouse he didn't like the way they were (leaglly) living thier life.
Not smart.
If he felt he MUST include a statement in his denial of service, he should have said, "I will not work for you becouse I don't like you."
Not liking someone is still accepted, I think.
It's just when you make the reasons known, that it can get a little touchy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
84Bill
|
NOV 11, 05:44 PM
|
|
A business owner SHOULD NEVER refuse service based on religion, race, sexual orientation, hair color or anything else.
A simple "NO" should suffice and if that isn't good enough then TS. The court system is always happy to find out why and then level damages. Its the reason they exist. Steal the peoples money and justify their existance.
|
|
|
|