An excellent publication, The New Civil Rights Movement which is run by a good colleague of mine (David Badash), pointed something out which I want to piggyback on because I want to make as much people as possible know this:
According to the Huffington Post, this is the story:
Since that time religious right and conservative outlets have been pushing the idea that Stutzman is in danger of losing her home and business. To them, she has become the face of their argument for so-called "religious liberty," or the idea using religious beliefs as an excuse for businesses to discriminate mainly against lgbts. As you read above, they have been emphasizing the idea that Stutzman could lose her home, life savings, and business. Even the American Family Association sent the following out:
But the notion that Stutzman could lose her home, life savings, etc for supposedly "opposing gay marriage" is a deliberate stretching of the truth.
"Barronelle Stutzman is now going to lose her business, her life savings, and possibly her own home for putting her faith into practice," Fox News' Erick Erickson claimed, incorrectly, yesterday.
Stutzman "stands to lose her business, her home, and her personal savings," a CNN op-ed today wrongly claimed.
And The Heritage Foundation ran this apparently fictive piece today:
In a phone interview with The Daily Signal, Barronelle Stutzman said the decision—and its accompanying fines—will put her flower shop out of business, or worse.
After the fines and legal fees, “There won’t be anything left,” Stutzman said. “They want my home, they want my business, they want my personal finances as an example for other people to be quiet.”
According to the Huffington Post, this is the story:
Benton County Superior Court Judge Alexander C. Ekstrom found that the florist (Stutzman) violated consumer protections when she wouldn't sell flowers for the same-sex wedding of a longtime customer because of her religious beliefs. The couple was protected by the Washington Law Against Discrimination, which prohibits bias based on sexual orientation, the court ruled.
Since that time religious right and conservative outlets have been pushing the idea that Stutzman is in danger of losing her home and business. To them, she has become the face of their argument for so-called "religious liberty," or the idea using religious beliefs as an excuse for businesses to discriminate mainly against lgbts. As you read above, they have been emphasizing the idea that Stutzman could lose her home, life savings, and business. Even the American Family Association sent the following out:
But the notion that Stutzman could lose her home, life savings, etc for supposedly "opposing gay marriage" is a deliberate stretching of the truth.