Annapolis Business says no to weddings because of gay marriage

[Baltimatt]

You forget that all the years of marriage for thousands of years, was between man and woman. Despite all the propaganda to the contrary gay marriage is all of a sudden comparitively speaking.

So how many men-women marriages (or attempted marriages) have led to lawsuits because the couple did not meet the religious requirements of a particular religious institution? And now all of a sudden gay people are going to start suing?

[Baltimatt]

I agree. Plus I think if true equality is what gay couples are looking for, then we would all use the same terms when referring to our partners without issue. Otherwise, it's not the same thing which is what people against gay marriage argued.

Will, it's not improper to refer to an opposite sex marriage partner as a spouse, although someone might get a little testy and say, "That's my wife!"

[regularguy]

Link.

An Annapolis company whose old-fashioned trolleys are iconic in the city's wedding scene has abandoned the nuptial industry rather than serve same-sex couples.

The owner of Discover Annapolis Tours said he decided to walk away from $50,000 in annual revenue instead of compromising his Christian convictions when same-sex marriages become legal in Maryland in less than a week. And he has urged prospective clients to lobby state lawmakers for a religious exemption for wedding vendors.

Here's what I don't understand. It's been illegal, for a number of years, for Maryland businesses to discriminate against customers on the basis of sexual orientation (as well as race, religion, etc.). Same-sex couples having been having church weddings for a number of years. (I went to one such wedding about 10 years ago.) The only difference now is that those weddings will be recognized as such under state law. So if he couldn't refuse to carry people on his trolley for a same-sex marriage 10 years ago, why is he getting all apoplectic about it now?

[NOTAGUNNUT]

It's his right to do so, despite the fact that you don't like it.

[regularguy]

It's his right to do so, despite the fact that you don't like it.

I agree it's his right right to stop doing all weddings. But it's been a number of years since he was entitled to discriminate against customers on the basis of sexual orientation.

[bmore_ken]

This is what I find ironic about it

For more than a decade, American Limousines in Baltimore has been filling part of that niche as the main trolley competitor, sending the company's two trolleys to Annapolis events and even helping Grubbs with larger events, said company owner Gary Day."I don't think he knew that I was gay," Day said of Grubbs, whom he talked with after Grubbs decided to leave the wedding industry. The topic of Day's sexual orientation and his partner of many years never came up.

You can't make stuff like that up

[Gopher]

Business owners make decisions about their businesses for all sorts of reasons. As long as no laws are violated then it's their business and their choice. You are free to patronize others who make decisions you approve of.

[Baltimatt]

The Sun has finally picked up the story.

[BiggSeth]

So how many men-women marriages (or attempted marriages) have led to lawsuits because the couple did not meet the religious requirements of a particular religious institution? And now all of a sudden gay people are going to start suing?

Matt

you and I engaged in this discussion just after the referendum became law.

and I have but one thing to add....

I told you so, and it did not take the 7-8 months (the summer wedding season) to happen. This PRIVATE BUSINESS OWNER decided to stop taking ALL wedding business vs. dealing with the nonsense which would have followed were he to simply state that same-sex marriage is not in line with his beleifs, and therefore his PRIVATE BUSINESS will not accept their demands to go against his religious teachings and traditions.

and of course for his efort to stay out of the fray, as if on queue, the 'tolerant' left starts in with the slurrs agains this man.

[bmore_ken]

What slurs? Did I miss a post?

[Baltimatt]

Matt

you and I engaged in this discussion just after the referendum became law.

and I have but one thing to add....

I told you so, and it did not take the 7-8 months (the summer wedding season) to happen. This PRIVATE BUSINESS OWNER decided to stop taking ALL wedding business vs. dealing with the nonsense which would have followed were he to simply state that same-sex marriage is not in line with his beleifs, and therefore his PRIVATE BUSINESS will not accept their demands to go against his religious teachings and traditions.

and of course for his efort to stay out of the fray, as if on queue, the 'tolerant' left starts in with the slurrs agains this man.

I thought you told me that religious organizations would be sued.

[Jeebus]

What slurs? Did I miss a post?

The only "slur" I could think of was "idiot" for refusing to take money for his business.

Last I checked gays don't spend pink money, it's all green on the outside.

[demopublican]

For the record I tried but my slurs were deleted.

[RavnFreek]

Just something to think about. The law says that religions do not have to perform ceremonies for same sex couples if it is against their beliefs. Why should these folks be excluded from that law?

[Baltimatt]

RavnFreek--

Maybe because they are not performing ceremonies and they are not religions. This guy runs a transportation business.

[octoburn]

I think it is a foolish business move, but I respect the owner for standing up for his personal, religious beliefs instead of pursuing profit if that is actually the case.

As for radical gays demanding special treatment by the act for merely expecting equal treatment when it comes to riding a trolley ~ that is yet another hysterical reaction from those who constantly feel victimized.

[Baltimatt]

[i]World Net Daily picks up the story, mistakenly telling us the company has closed.

Was it a mistake or a deliberate lie?

[octoburn]

[i]World Net Daily picks up the story, mistakenly telling us the company has closed.

Was it a mistake or a deliberate lie?

World Net Daily ~ What do you think?

[Baltimatt]

Octoburn--

The latter. Much as I believe the National Organization for Marriage deliberately lied as discussed earlier in this thread.

[regularguy]

Just something to think about. The law says that religions do not have to perform ceremonies for same sex couples if it is against their beliefs. Why should these folks be excluded from that law?

A few decades ago, many churches in the South believed that racial segregation was the will of God. (Some apparently still do today.) While churches are not required by any law to allow integrated worship services or weddings, private businesses are prohibited from discriminating against customers based on their race.

Same thing here.