Published On: Fri, Feb 20th, 2015

Washington florist Barronelle Stutzman may lose home, savings after gay wedding court loss

A state judge ruled Wednesday that Washington floral artist and grandmother Barronelle Stutzman must provide full support for wedding ceremonies that are contrary to her faith – a decision at odds with the views of most Americans according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll.

The court claims that Stutzman’s referral of a long-time customer to another business for floral design and support for a same-sex ceremony violated Washington law.

photo/screenshot Fox video coverage from Staples Center at 2014 Grammy Awards

photo/screenshot Fox video coverage from Staples Center at 2014 Grammy Awards

The court also ruled recently that both the state and the same-sex couple, who each filed lawsuits against her, may collect damages and attorneys’ fees not only from her business, but from Stutzman personally. That means the 70-year-old grandmother may not only lose her business, but also her home and savings because she lives her life and operates her business according to her beliefs.

“The message of these rulings is unmistakable: the government will bring about your personal and professional ruin if you don’t help celebrate same-sex marriage,” said ADF Senior Counsel Kristen Waggoner, who argued before the court in December.

“The two men had no problem getting the flowers they wanted. They received several offers for free flowers, and the marketplace gives them plenty of options. Laws that are supposed to prohibit discrimination might sound good, but the government has begun to use these laws to hurt people – to force them to conform and to silence and punish them if they don’t violate their religious beliefs on marriage.”

“America would be a better place if citizens respected each others’ differences and the government still protected the freedom to have those differences,” said Stutzman. “Instead, the government is coming after me and everything I have just because I won’t live my life the way the state says I should. I just want the freedom to live and work faithfully and according to what God says about marriage without fear of punishment. Others have the freedom to say or not say what they want to about marriage, and that’s all I’m asking for as well.”

In State of Washington v. Arlene’s Flowers, Benton County Superior Court Judge Alexander Ekstrom ruled on Jan. 7 that Stutzman was personally liable for the claims against her, placing both her personal and professional livelihood in jeopardy. Ekstrom then granted summary judgment Wednesday against both Stutzman and her business; therefore, the case will not proceed to trial. ADF attorneys will appeal the rulings.

“A government that tells you what you can’t say is bad enough, but a government that tells you what you must say is terrifying,” Waggoner explained. “The lesson from the court’s decisions is that you put your home, your family business, and your life savings at risk by daring to defy a government mandate that forces you to promote views you believe are wrong.”

Ekstrom accepted Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s argument that Stutzman violated the state’s Law Against Discrimination and its Consumer Protection Act for acting consistent with her Christian faith. Ekstrom concluded that Stutzman must provide full wedding support for same-sex ceremonies, including custom design work to decorate the ceremony, delivery to the forum, staying at the ceremony to touch up arrangements, and assisting the wedding party.

“The court somehow concluded that forcing Barronelle to create expression against her will does not violate her free speech and free exercise rights under the state and federal constitutions,” said ADF Legal Counsel Jonathan Scruggs. “To the contrary, this ruling ignores the pre-eminent civil right law of our nation – the First Amendment – and allows the state to force citizens to choose between conforming their beliefs to the state’s ideology and suffering severe consequences.”

Just before Robert Ingersoll, a customer who had a close friendship with Stutzman for nine years, sued Stutzman through his American Civil Liberties Union attorneys for acting consistently with her faith, Ferguson, in an unprecedented move, filed a suit of his own against her after hearing about the situation through news reports, not because of any complaint filed with his office.

Both suits came after Stutzman politely referred Ingersoll to three of the many area florists who were willing to create the custom floral arrangements the couple wanted. Several florists ultimately offered the two men free flowers and wedding services.


On the DISPATCH: Headlines  Local  Opinion

Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter

* indicates required

About the Author

- The generic Dispatch designation, used primarily for press releases or syndicated content, but may be used for guest author requesting a generic nomenclature

Displaying 6 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Conchchowder says:

    “Love one another” didn’t come with a caviat. It was a COMMANDMENT.

    • Ray says:

      What’s more unloving: saying I don’t want to make your wedding flowers or bankrupting a senior citizen over her religious beliefs? She was never mean or cruel to the gay couple and we should be defending her freedom of conscience.


    […] Washington florist Barronelle Stutzman may lose home, savings after gay wedding court loss […]

  3. Joe Baltierra says:

    Great! Justice served and well deserved! If you read the “neutral” “news” article and change the Plaintiff to a Black couple, Asian couple, Hispanic couple, etc,, you see how truly offensive and repulsive it is that Arlene would tell anyone that she is not going to provide services to them. Does it make a difference that she “politely” referred them to another florist?? Absolutely not! As a business that is open to the public, she has an obligation to serve the public. She can’t pick and choose who she would like to serve based on her religious beliefs. It wasn’t too long ago that the Mormon Church had an issue with Black people. If Arlene were Mormon, shouldn’t she be able to close her doors to Black customers? Why sure! Why not? Her religious beliefs would allow her to do so. Get the BIG picture now? As a public business, she has an obligation to serve the public In the privacy of her mind and in the pews of her church, she is more than welcome to hate the niggers, the kikes, the chinks, the fags, and everyone else who is a child of God.

    • Ray says:

      You are also so bigoted. Buying flowers is NOT a right and these folks had other places they could have gotten their flowers, but insisted on pressing their lifestyle against this woman’s beliefs, which should be protected in America.

      If you don’t like what she believes, then shop somewhere else. This is a travesty.

    • Patrick says:

      How about they take the contract and inform the couple that 100% of the money will be donated to organizations that promote traditional marriage? And, to add to that, it will be donated in the name of the couple. Would that be acceptable?

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Sign up for our Weekly Newsletter



At the Movies

Pin It