More Christian Bigotry: florists refuse to deliver FFRF’s flowers to Jessica Ahlquist

[cleanhippie]

The Freedom From Religion Foundation discovered the shocking extent of petty and vindictive community reactions against 16 year old litigant Jessica Ahlquist when it attempted earlier this week to order a dozen roses to be delivered to the victorious state/church plaintiff in Cranson, R.I. FFRF is in the process of filing a complaint about one of the floral shops with Rhode Island’s human rights division over the civil rights violation.

Working through a Wisconsin flower shop Tuesday, Annie Laurie Gaylor, FFRF co-president, placed what she believed to be a routine order: A dozen red roses to be delivered on Wednesday with the message to Jessica: “Congratulations, and hang in there, with admiration from FFRF.”

Late yesterday, the local florist called FFRF’s office to report she had struck out at three Cranston florist’s shops, including at Twins Florist, which responded to the order in writing with this statement: “I will not deliver to this person.” The other two shops mysteriously produced unusual excuses for refusing the order. Gaylor said when she heard this news, “My jaw literally dropped. Everyone is stunned by the bigotry.”

FFRF was told a Warwick floral shop as of Wednesday had agreed to make the delivery today with no additional long distance charge. This morning, FFRF discovered it too was refusing the order, citing the excuse of unwanted media attention.

http://ffrf.org/news/releases/rhode-island-florists-refuse-to-deliver-ffrfs-flowers-to-jessica-ahlqu/

Feel that christian love and tolerance, y'all. Jesus is proud, I'm sure.

[Goblinmonger]

1. What the Fuck?

I mean, seriously, WHAT. THE. FUCK.

Wonder what the apologists will have to say?

[cleanhippie]

3. I'm nearly positive that our resident apologists will be noticably silent on this, as usual.

[Sal316]

6. Ascribing religion to be the motivation seems to be a bit of a stretch.

The release from the FFRF doesn't even make that leap in logic.

Me thinks your bias is showing.

[Goblinmonger]

8. On cue.

Please do enlighten me as to the reason why a florist (no, actually, several florists) would refuse to deliver flowers that have been paid for to this young girl. And did the term "bigotry" in the press release not indicate something to you? Did you think they were bigoted against slim high school girls?

[Sal316]

13. Now I'm an apologist?

Never mind that, oh, just below I said I found the florists excuses to be lame assed.

Tell you what...

Why don't you call those florists and find out their reasoning and let us all know.

Otherwise, you're just assuming.

[Goblinmonger]

16. What possible reasons are there for not delivering to her?

1. They don't want the money?
2. They don't go to that part of town?

Neither of those seem right since they would have said the 2nd if it were true.

The only things I have left are
3. They think they will lose business if they do.
4. They don't want to deliver to the girl that made the school take down the prayer.

Both of those are either direct bigotry or supporting bigotry. If you have another option, fill me in.

[cbayer]

17. It appears to me that Sal agrees with you.

[Goblinmonger]

18. While still wanting to take religion out of the mix.

Which seems to miss the point.

[cbayer]

20. Even FFRF doesn't make the same assumption to motive as the OP of this thread does.

Nowhere in the article do they ascribe it to religious beliefs by the owners of the shops.

Could be a business decision. Could be because they have been threatened.

It's only the OP and some members responding in this thread that have drawn the conclusion that it was based on religious beliefs. Even you don't do that in your list of possible options.

The headline "More Christian bigotry" is just inflammatory.

The owners of the shops are wrong, however, and should be honest about their motives for refusing, imo.

[cleanhippie]

21. What possible other reason could there be?

The two most likely reasons were given above. If not that, then what?


I think you are only trying to convince yourself.

[Sal316]

32. That's my whole point...thanks.

Attributing it to religion is simply speaking out of turn and without any evidence.

Could it be? Sure.

Can it be definitively said, as the OP headline screams. Hellz no.

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. If it's threats, or fear of loss of business, then the bigotry is pervasive in the community

If you daren't follow your normal, harmless line of business for fear of retaliation from a whole load of bigots, then the problem is far worse. It's gone from "we found a few bigoted florists" to "we found a whole community so bigoted that they appear ready to hurt people who just associate with the primary target of bigotry, and ther eare so many that they coerce unbigoted people into following them".

It's as plain as the nose on your face that Christian bigotry is the driving force of this; it may be problems with a few individuals, or it could be systemic bigotry in that whole community.

[cbayer]

52. I am not arguing that there is not bigotry at play here.

Clearly there is.

[muriel_volestrangler]

55. And that bigotry is displayed by some Christians

who don't think their Christian prayer should be erased from the school wall. The bigotry is there (and is called 'bigotry' in the quote from the FFRF person); I don't think "more Christian bigotry" is inflammatory, therefore.

[cbayer]

56. Point taken.

I still think the headline is intentionally inflammatory, while, as you point out, it may be factually correct.

It looks like flypaper to me, and, not surprisingly, it got a fly.

[Sal316]

33. Money, avoiding the news notoriety...

Could be a number of things, and none of the 4 you listed even come close to not doing it for "religious reasons".

I know you WANT it to be for religious reasons, but wanting it to be and it actually being for religious reasons is quite the logical leap.

[Dorian Gray]

43. I'm actually

shocked by this. I can't believe businesses are refusing business.

[Sal316]

2. Lame. Assed. Excuses.

[cbayer]

7. Agree. Pretty despicable.

[Angry Dragon]

4. Satan has aquired more souls to roast

Satan is a happy camper, with this and the republican presidential race he said he is running out of room

[MarkCharles]

5. Wish we had all the time and money to sue these bigots, but unfortunately

there's just too too many religiously inspired bigots out there.

If Jessica were black or something as simple as that, we could easily put these religious merchants out of business, based upon their bigotry in the face of American law.

[humblebum]

9. Is it even possible to be bigoted against a bigot? nt

[ZombieHorde]

10. Are you defending the actions against this teenage girl, who has received death and rape threats? nt

[humblebum]

11. How you got that from that is anyone's guess. nt

[ZombieHorde]

12. You generally side against atheists,

so I am asking you to clarify your statement.

[humblebum]

15. I think it's pretty self explanatory. nt

[ZombieHorde]

19. I don't think your comment is self explanatory.

Will you please explain it?

[2ndAmForComputers]

40. It is. You called Jessica Ahlquist a bigot.

Now, the question is, why are you trying so hard to deny you said that? AFAIK, Jessica Ahlquist is not a member of this forum, so insulting her, although exceedingly petty and hateful, shouldn't be against the rules.

So, why the tiptoeing?

[humblebum]

41. Nowhere did say that nor imply it. nt

[LeftishBrit]

50. Then why ask if it's possible to be bigoted against a bigot?

Who are the 'bigots' in this case?

ETA: And even if you didn't mean Jessica - you are *still* implying that some people deserve bigotry, or are out of the reach of general rules against bigotry, because they have expressed prejudices themselves. This is a nasty version of the 'eye for an eye that makes the whole world blind'. It's like e.g. saying 'Is it even possible to commit a crime against a criminal?' - implying that once you have broken the law anyone should have a right to commit any crime they wish against you.

NO ONE deserves bigotry; not even those who have themselves shown bigotry.

[Dorian Gray]

76. This +10000

[mr blur]

23. Because that's the kind of thing you usually do. nt

[Goblinmonger]

14. What does that mean in this instance? n/t

[cleanhippie]

22. Just who is it that you are calling a bigot in all this?

Who is the bigot here, humblebum?

[humblebum]

24. Where did I call anyone a bigot? I merely asked a very simple question and

Have yet to receive a simple answer. Would you feel the same way if these florists had denied service to a racist group?

[cleanhippie]

25. You asked if it was possible to be bigoted against a bigot.

Who is the bigot in your question?

If you are simy asking a general question that has nothing to do with the OP, them u need to take it elsewhere.

So who is the bigot?

[humblebum]

26. Answer the question or u "need to take it elsewhere."nt

[cleanhippie]

27. YOU answer the fucking question. Who is the bigot?

You said it, now explain yourself.

[humblebum]

28. The question was a rhetorical question to begin with, but I asked mine first, and

as usual you make whatever assertions you feel, whether they are valid or not. If you don't like what is being said, maybe you just try to censor it. Seems like a fairly common reaction.

[mr blur]

30. Why don't you just answer the question?

The longer you refuse to, the dumber you look .

[humblebum]

31. I am not in the habit of answering my own questions, especially when

they are so self-explanatory.

[cleanhippie]

34. Not sure that is actually possible.

[humblebum]

35. You have the most difficult time answering a simple don't question,

don't you? Evasion, avoidance, you'll try anything. But, I think you have answered the question unwittingly.

[cleanhippie]

46. You have the most difficulty being honest

don't you? Obfuscation, misrepresentation, you'll try anything. But I think you have already demonstrated that to everyone.

[humblebum]

47. If I asked you,"What color is the sky?," you would would gnaw off

your own leg to find out what esoteric intention was behind asking such a question? LOL!

[muriel_volestrangler]

51. If it was a rhetorical question, then you were trying to make a point

And people want you to be clear on the point you were making. So far, you've refused to explain it; people have taken your rhetorical question at face value, and agreed that you are calling the girl a bigot. You have the chance to clarify that you aren't; so far, you've refused to take that. Unsurprisingly, people think they called it right in the first place; you are calling her a bigot (and introducing the case of a racist group as a comparison seems to show you think the FFRF is bigoted too).

You should know that you are making yourself look truly bad in this sub-thread. You've got Christians shaking their head in disbelief at your attitude, not just atheists. Why not stop digging your hole deeper, and state that you don't think she or the FFRF are bigots?

[humblebum]

54. There is more than one party involved in this scenario, you know.

The florists, the FFRF , and the girl.

I do consider the FFRF to be bigoted much of the time, and no doubt the florists, too, for refusing the orders. Although, I can see how they are trying to protect their businesses. My opinion of most organized anti-religious groups is that they are bigoted.

[Goblinmonger]

58. Jesus

"Oh, I can understand why the florists are bigoted because they are trying to make money" but you can't possibly understand that what the FFRF does is protect the first amendment. Perhaps you want to include the ACLU in that group of bigots you have created.

It often seems like you will do ANYTHING to apologize for the theist assholes of the world and to attack any atheists that get together in a group.

[humblebum]

59. Let's just say that the FFRF has a different take on the 1st Amendment than I do and

you have a way of cementing my opinion.

[Goblinmonger]

60. I have no doubt that they do.

And I wear my differences with you on the issue as a badge of honor.

[humblebum]

64. So glad I could keep you entertained. But that's good,

because you'll need to get used to it.

[cleanhippie]

66. Were ALL used to it, we have had to deal with your posts for some time.

Mr Blur called it spot on.

[cleanhippie]

57. He won't state that because that what he actually believes.

Its despicable and disgusting.

Glad you are seeing his act for what is is too.

[Goblinmonger]

29. They denied service to the young girl

not the FFRF. "We won't deliver to her" is not a statement against the mean old organized atheists, contrary to your wishes.

So, is this young girl a bigot?

[Odin2005]

37. You are implying that Jessica is a bigot.

Quit trying to backtrack and deny it, that is what you are implying.

[humblebum]

38. And just where did I imply such a thing? nt

[Odin2005]

39. Keep dodging, it just makes you look like a jerk.

[humblebum]

42. I am not the one doing all the name calling here. That Sir is you. nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

61. Yes, actually, you are.

"Is it possibly to be bigotted against a bigot", in a thread discussing bigotry against Miss Alquist, is very clearly an attempt to imply that she is a bigot.

That you won't either deny that you meant that, or admit it, but continue to try to play silly buggers, is, frankly, contemptible.

[humblebum]

62. Please show where I said that. Otherwise, can it. nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

77. In the title of post #9. N.T.

[humblebum]

78. Um? Where in there did I call anyone a name? If you look closely

that was an open question. who did I call a name?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

79. Are you going to claim that your intent was not to imply that Jessica Ahlquist was a bigot?

In a thread about bigotry directed at Ms Ahlquist, I find it very hard indeed to believe that asking "is it possible to be bigotted against a bigot" is anything other than an attempt to imply that she is a bigot - after all, if it isn't, it's a complete non-sequitur.

I find it even harder to believe that that wasn't the intent when, time and again, you've refused to deny that it was the intent, but gone round and round in circles instead.

So, one clear and simple and direct question: was or was not that your intent?

[humblebum]

82. Yep. That was not my intent as already stated. nt

[Dorian Gray]

44. Come on....

you totally did. They are not wrong.

[Odin2005]

36. What horseshit. She is the VICTIM of bigotry.

She was threatened with RAPE and MURDER.

[cbayer]

45. This subthread is utterly ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous.

[Heddi]

83. wow, strong words there

keep fighting the good fight, host.

[2ndAmForComputers]

84. Its ridiculousness is borne out solely of the poster who started it.

Don't you agree?

[backscatter712]

48. Just what are you insinuating?

Don't answer that.

[LeftishBrit]

53. Jessica is not a bigot; but in any case, the answer is obviously yes.

E.g. to give a recent example: Santorum, or people close to him, made the bigoted statement that Bachmann should not be president because women are unfit to rule. The fact that Bachmann is herself bigoted against just about everyone, and gays in particular, does not nullify or excuse the sexist bigotry of Santorum's (or his supporters') statement.

But I doubt that this is what you're referring to.

[unapatriciated]

68. Thank You for answering his question with the perfect example.

and I agree that this is not what he was referring to. I also doubt now that his question has been answered that he will respond to the many on this thread if he is calling the young woman a bigot.

[cleanhippie]

74. He thinks anyone who is a non- believer is a bigot.

He uses his own definition for many words, regardless of how they are actually defined. It's his MO.

[Iggo]

80. Is it possible to look into a mirror, and then to look around the room?

[humblebum]

81. I've always wondered. Can shadows have shadows? nt

[Angry Dragon]

87. maybe

[Angry Dragon]

86. maybe

[MarkCharles]

65. Two OTHER threads on this topic in other forums:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10168409

and here:

Some florist from the next state, Connecticut actually pulled through with delivering... after 4 refused.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12302909

[The Straight Story]

67. As a Christian myself I think this is a good call out on bigotry - with a 'but' thrown in

The but is: Suppose this was a student who fought against having a gay/straight club and won and some fundies (yes, I use that word with respect to those of my faith that are fundamentalists) called a shop owned by a gay person (obviously, that would be unknown to them). Would it be bigotry if they didn't want to deliver it or speaking out against what they saw as something wrong?

[Bluenorthwest]

69. I am fairly sick to death of straight folks using the gay community as rhetorical fodder

particularly those 'of faith'. It is unseemly. The faith community is the source of the majority of the anti gay hysteria world wide. At a certain point, the lack of respect gets grating. Just saying.
Your argument is specious anyway, as your Christian florists hold full and equal rights, they are not oppressed and they are free to practice as they wish. The girl they are discriminating against is not attempting to keep them from their faith, nor from their rights as Americans. The 'faith community' does all of those things to the gay community. So it is a poor choice of attempted co-option for those reasons, as well as the decorum and decency reasons.
It just gets old and grating.

[yardwork]

70. Agreed, and I'm going to add my two cents.

[yardwork]

71. Gay people provide services to people who don't like us every day.

We'd lose our jobs or our businesses if we did not.

[The Straight Story]

72. I am well aware of that.

You can replace 'gay' with any other group you wish (I used it because a gay friend of mine owned a flower shop and it was familiar to me).

The point was - is it always considered hate/bigotry or are there genuine causes that folks would act the same way in and if so would it still be bigotry?

[yardwork]

73. Yes, it would be bigotry to deny services to somebody just because you don't like them.

Somebody else in this thread compared this situation to refusing service to the Klan. That's not a valid comparison imo because the Klan is a violent organization that kills people. If I owned a flower shop I might well refuse to deliver flowers addressed to the local Ku Klux Klan.

But refusing to deliver flowers to a sixteen year old girl who stood up for her constitutional rights? That's bigotry.

[cleanhippie]

75. Yes, that is bigotry.

[2ndAmForComputers]

85. "...fought against having a gay/straight club and won..."

Such a win in a court of law would be a much, much bigger problem than some random homophobic individual.