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).]
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.
[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.
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?
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.
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).]
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.
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).]
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.
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.
BS, Bill. I can choose to do business with whoever I want when it comes to their choice of PRACTICING a lifestyle..........and I will.
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
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.
I don't know how old you are, Scott, but when I was young, homosexuality was probably almost as reviled as pedophilia. I sometimes wonder what happened to make it 'acceptable'. And I wonder too, if the Pedophiles had had as much vociferous , yet MINORITYsupport that homosexuals did then,(often in very high places of power, such as Government) and still do, perhaps it could have become 'acceptable' too. And then YOU would be the one being denigrated now, for objecting to something you find abhorrent. Yet you would still FIND it abhorrent..just that you would not be allowed to protest about it, without being stigmatised in the way that people who find homosexuality equally as abhorrent, are today. Just suppose it was made legal...would you change your attitude to it, because an ultra-permissive society found it should be allowed? Would you give up your belief that it was wrong, and condone such actions by working with Pedophiles? If, as I believe, your answer is a resounding 'NO!!', then you should equally not demand that people are forced to accept that which they innately believe to be wrong, and totally un-natural.They nhad the right, and used it .Personal choice. And they WERE civil, polite and honest. They could have quite simply accepted that those people didn't want to work with,or for them, and found somebody else who would. No, they chose to stir up a hornet's nest, just because they are 'Gay'. I am getting tired of the high profile they demand, and receive, BECAUSE they are homosexuals. Why does Society come down on straight people for not liking homosexuality? Why should they be forced to accept, or condone, something they find totally un-natural, and abhorrent? Yes, I find it abhorrent. Probably because I was molested 4 times by homosexuals between the ages of 7 and 15. You want me to like them, or even accept them? I was scarred, and still am, by those assaults. So I can't find it in my heart, or soul, to feel any sympathy for them. Hell, I suffered homosexuality AND pedophilia attacks simultaneously..and I wished those people dead for their attacks. In those days, I was too scared to admit to ANYBODY what had happened to me .I had to get through it alone.But the scars are still there, deep down. Just as a woman who has been raped, bears a fear of men for a long time, possibly for life. And before anybody comes back and says not all homosexuals are predatory...that may be true. But first and foremost, they WERE homosexuals. Nick Nick
If you admit to that in court John... you will be found guilty of discrimination and probably fined heavily. Better keep your hateintolorance preference to yourself.
quote
Originally posted by jstricker:
BS, Bill. I can choose to do business with whoever I want when it comes to their choice of PRACTICING a lifestyle..........and I will.
John Stricker
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 11-11-2006).]
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.
quote
Originally posted by jstricker:
BS, Bill. I can choose to do business with whoever I want when it comes to their choice of PRACTICING a lifestyle..........and I will.
John Stricker
Actually, the way I read Bill's post was you should never use religion, race, sexual orientation, etc. as the reason. You should just politely decline their buisness and not be obligated to give a reason.
Again, you assume hate. There is none. I don't care what they do, it's their lives. Just don't make me give my money to support it because I'm not going to and if I end up in jail for it I really don't care.
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
If you admit to that in court John... you will be found guilty of discrimination and probably fined heavily. Better keep your hate to yourself.
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
John, I never said lie. I did, however, allude to omission. Omission, becouse a personal opinion of someone, espiecally a client, should be kept just that, personal.
Good buisness keeps personal feelings about the customer out of it. I know, I deal with it every day. If I only served people I personally like, we'd be out of buissness. It's not my job to approve or dissapprove of how they live thier life. As a matter-of-fact, it's none of my buisness, and should have no bearing on the quality of service they can expect. At the very least, no more so then anyone else is entitled to.
Actually, the way I read Bill's post was you should never use religion, race, sexual orientation, etc. as the reason. You should just politely decline their buisness and not be obligated to give a reason.
But...isn't it a shame that we don't have freedom of association (which includes NOT to associate)?
Thats just it, you arent supporting them but this thread isn't about that issue, it's about them supporting you and your business as a landscaper who refuses a service based solely on sexual orentation / preferences.
quote
Originally posted by jstricker:
Again, you assume hate. There is none. I don't care what they do, it's their lives. Just don't make me give my money to support it because I'm not going to and if I end up in jail for it I really don't care.
Originally posted by 84Bill: If you admit to that in court John... you will be found guilty of discrimination and probably fined heavily. Better keep your hateintolorance preference to yourself.
Has Sexual Orientation been added to the Anti-Discrimination rules? Damn, I didn't know that.
------------------ 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.
Time = Money. If I'm forced to work for someone I'm forced to give my time, whether I'm compensated for it or not. I would presume that whoever I was working for thought they were getting MORE than they were paying for or they would just do it themselves. There is no difference.
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
I amended my previous post.
Thats just it, you arent supporting them but this thread isn't about that issue, it's about them supporting you and your business as a landscaper who refuses a service based solely on sexual orentation / preferences.
Well... it does appear to be the topic of discussion. Should it be? I believe it should. No reson to discrminate on the basis of X because we are supposed to be a progressive nation with a wide variety of cultures who are supposed to tolorant of one another. I thought thats what being American was all about and what makes us a great country.. I suppose you are right and I am wrong?
quote
Originally posted by blackrams: Has Sexual Orientation been added to the Anti-Discrimination rules? Damn, I didn't know that.
That's BS too, Boonie, and you know it. If you come and ask me to work for you and I just say "no, I don't want to work for you" the next thing out of your mouth (if I'm in that line of work) is "WHY??". At that point, I either tell the truth or lie.
I choose the truth, I can't imagine why I should have to choose any other way.
Also, I'm not talking about something or someone I "like". I'm talking about a lifestyle choice that my religion and personal beliefs say is wrong. Tolerance does not mean we have to SUPPORT people doing things we believe to be evil and wrong.
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by Boondawg:
John, I never said lie. I did, however, allude to omission. Omission, becouse a personal opinion of someone, espiecally a client, should be kept just that, personal.
Good buisness keeps personal feelings about the customer out of it. I know, I deal with it every day. If I only served people I personally like, we'd be out of buissness. It's not my job to approve or dissapprove of how they live thier life. As a matter-of-fact, it's none of my buisness, and should have no bearing on the quality of service they can expect. At the very least, no more so then anyone else is entitled to.
Time = Money. If I'm forced to work for someone I'm forced to give my time, whether I'm compensated for it or not. SNIP:
John Stricker
No body is forcing you to do anything. If you cant do the job thgen say "no, I cant do the job." Instead this ass clown is saying "I wont do the job because I hate gays" That not a justifyable reason... its discriminatory.
Originally posted by 84Bill: Well... it does appear to be the topic of discussion. Should it be? I believe it should. No reson to discrminate on the basis of X because we are supposed to be a progressive nation with a wide variety of cultures who are supposed to tolorant of one another. I thought thats what being American was all about and what makes us a great country.. I suppose you are right and I am wrong?
I believe that is the issue, can a business owner not sell his/her service or product to a specific group, in this case gays. What if they choose to not sell to drug dealers or gangs because what the potential customer represented was against their religios beliefs. Now you've got a religious freedom issue. BTW, my post above was an honest question, not meant as a flame. Tolerance, that road goes both ways, seems to me the gay dudes should understand and be tolerant of the businesses beliefs. It does go both ways doesn't it? Hmm, maybe not.
------------------ 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.
Again, you throw the word "hate" around and nothing in the original post even comes close to making that assumption. they said "I need to tell you that we cannot meet with you because we choose not to work for homosexuals." There's no hate there. They don't say you should be strung up by your testicles. No, instead THEY are threatened with being beaten and sodomized.
If we don't see the world through YOUR eyes we "hate". Screw that Bill. I don't hate anyone, but I'm still going to choose who I hire, who I work for, and who I associate with, (if you like it or not).
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
No body is forcing you to do anything. If you cant do the job thgen say "no, I cant do the job." Instead this ass clown is saying "I wont do the job because I hate gays" That not a justifyable reason... its discriminatory.
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
Individual... exactly. If as individuals they didn't want to interact with gay people, fine. As a BUSINESS they made the decision to discriminate against gays in a manner completely separate from the service they provide. Mowing someones lawn for a fee is not supporting their lifestyle. Would have been simple enough just to not submit a bid, but they decided to put something out there declaring a that they were doing it for discriminatory reasons. Not that it wouldn't be profitable, not that they had a request to do something to the yard that was against their morales. It was the people themselves. The civil rights bit pops up.. where is the line?
Libertarian in me says you have every right as an individual not to do business with a company or an individual, but as a business the individual's right to the same level of service anyone else enjoys trumps when the request is the same. If the business consists of just the couple, I'd say fine... I'd tend to believe the 'individual' rights start breaking down when you've got a company. Where exactly is that line? Can American Airlines say tomorrow that they won't allow gay people to travel on their airline? A major taxi company refusing to pick up passengers that might be frequenting a known gay club? A national restaurant chain refusing service? A high end multi million dollar steakhouse? A family run diner?
I doubt the people that put the work out for bid want the company to do the work after the letter. But what if there was only one landscaping company in town?
The line is always being pushed one way or the other. Here I don't think it effects anything except for revealing the company to be run by people that aren't to bright.
every dyke i know would NEVER let a Texan mow her lawn. so yes, i believe the landscaper in houston should have the freedom to refuse to cut a gay house's grass. he has the right to be a knob and to refuse to provide service to gays. he does not have protection from criticism for being a knob. one of the consequences of being a knob is being called on it. freedom to act according to your own ethics, is not the same thing as the freedom form social consequences of those actions.
Originally posted by jstricker:If you come and ask me to work for you and I just say "no, I don't want to work for you" the next thing out of your mouth (if I'm in that line of work) is "WHY??". At that point, I either tell the truth or lie.
Or, you could just say, "Becouse it's my right to choose whom I do & don't work for."
quote
Originally posted by jstricker: I'm talking about a lifestyle choice that my religion and personal beliefs say is wrong.
And other religions say kill blacks, beat women, and cut the heads off Americans. Religion is personal, and should have nothing to do with buisness. And I believe your bible says, "Hate the sin, but pity the sinner".
Question: Would you do buisness with someone who hates blacks? Would you want to know that before you attempt to do buisness with them? Would you ask them? Is it any of your buisness? Would it make a difference weither you agreed or disagreed with their beliefs?
Meaning, do you, or can you, hand out a questioneer asking people about thier beliefs, sexual orintation, likes & dislikes, religion, family history, etc., before you do buisness with them?
Or, is it that none of that is any of your buisness and should have no bearing on your desision to provide them service?
[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 11-11-2006).]
Originally posted by blackrams: Tolerance, that road goes both ways, seems to me the gay dudes should understand and be tolerant of the businesses beliefs. It does go both ways doesn't it? Hmm, maybe not.
I sincerely believe that the question above is the real question. Whose intolerance is being questioned?
------------------ 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.
Again, you throw the word "hate" around and nothing in the original post even comes close to making that assumption.
I throw it out there because thats the way I view intolorance. Intolorance is just a euphimism for hate and discrimination and is the reason inequities and injustice to exist.
quote
they said "I need to tell you that we cannot meet with you because we choose not to work for homosexuals." There's no hate there.
In other words.. we hate fags like you and we wont work for you. They don't have to say it no more than I say that I love John Stricker. I can say it in so many other ways but the point of my message will be either I am tolorant of you or I am not. Up till recently I have not been very tolortant of you.
IN ANY CASE As a public entity (IE person doing business in and for the public) there has to be accountability for their blatent lack of equal service to the community at large. Discrimination can not be tolorated.
Originally posted by blackrams: I believe that is the issue, can a business owner not sell his/her service or product to a specific group, in this case gays. What if they choose to not sell to drug dealers or gangs because what the potential customer represented was against their religios beliefs. Now you've got a religious freedom issue. BTW, my post above was an honest question, not meant as a flame. Tolerance, that road goes both ways, seems to me the gay dudes should understand and be tolerant of the businesses beliefs. It does go both ways doesn't it? Hmm, maybe not.
If the guy doesn't want to do the work for what ever reason I don't care. Its his lose of buisness. Last I checked in the US you could still refuse service to any one for any reason. If the guy wants to be a discriminating bigot let him its money he could have used to feed his family.
Originally posted by Phranc: its money he could have used to feed his family.
I think he was more concerned that this work would better the Quality Of Life of a few gay men. And that would have been seen as an endorsement of their lifestyle. And his God would hate him for that.
I think he was more concerned that this work would better the Quality Of Life of a few gay men. And that would have been seen as an endorsement of their lifestyle. And his God would hate him for that.
Then its just more proof he has his head firly planted straight up his uptight butt. Ohwell I will sit back and laugh at his idiocy. If I was a compeating buisness I'd just rush in offer the same work for less $$$ and ride the PR wave to more jobs.
