Bridal Store Refuses to Sell Wedding Dresses to Lesbians

The owner of a Pennsylvania bridal shop recently claimed that her faith precluded her from selling a dress to a same-sex couple.

Shannon Kennedy and Julie Ann Samanas said the incident happened July 8 at W.W. Bridal Boutique in Bloomsburg, about two-and-a-half hours north of Philadelphia. The West Pittston couple visited the shop in search of a dress for Samanas for the couple’s March 2018 wedding.

“We filled out the form that said ‘Bride’s name,’ ‘Budget’ and then where it said ‘Groom,’ we crossed it out and wrote ‘Bride’ and put Shannon’s name down,” Samanas explained.

The couple, who were accompanied by Samanas’ sister, handed one of the two women who was working the form and, after reviewing it, she inquired if the dress was for a same-sex wedding.

“She said, ‘I don’t know if you’ve heard, but we’re Christian and we don’t believe in that; our faith doesn’t let us believe in that,’” Kennedy recalled.

The women said they didn’t challenge the staff member and exited.

“I think we were kind of in shock,” Kennedy said. “We all looked at each other and went, ‘Oo-k’ and walked out. It was unexpected. Afterwards, you think of everything you should have said.”

W.W. Bridal Boutique did not respond to a request for comment.

The women posted about the incident on Facebook and tagged the store. In a July 11 post that has since been deleted, the store posted: ”The owners of W.W. Bridal Boutique reserve the rights afforded to them by the First Amendment of the Constitution to live out our lives according to our faith. ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.’ We will continue to serve our customers based on the tenets of our faith.”

Kenney and Samanas said they believe the operators of the store’s Facebook page have blocked them both.

epgn.com/news/local/12295-lesbian-couple-turned-away-from-pa-bridal-shop

Other urls found in this thread:

epgn.com/news/local/12295-lesbian-couple-turned-away-from-pa-bridal-shop
archive.is/pxvMT
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association#United_States_Constitution
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>epgn.com/news/local/12295-lesbian-couple-turned-away-from-pa-bridal-shop
archive.is/pxvMT

also

Why should I care? Saged

bump

Post ur face when conservative christians that dont need government gibs to pay for their weddings start to get their wives dresses here

This shop deserves our support.

Why?

Oh, no! How dare they practice freedom of religion! How dare they!

Because those faggots are going to parade this around as some kind of attack on them personally when instead they can just go to another fucking bridal store. It's fucking capitalism

The dykes probably planned to get turned down from the start

Why do fags even want to participate in a ritual that has its roots in a religion that wants them killed? God I fucking hate gay people they're so annoying.

Marriage existed prior to Christianity. It exists in a secular context whether you approve or not.

tell me the purpose of marriage.

Gays were never permitted to be married you mentally ill retard. Fucking kill yourself.

I would of referred them to a Muslim place if business, that would eagerly help them with their wedding dreams.

Not a problem.

There is an opportunity cost to denying service. If it is so detrimental, other businesses will benefit from the sale + positive press coming from providing service instead.

Please, do go on about your justification for homosexual marriage.

I'm going to call them and thank them. Offer any support they need.

Why are these people always such narcissists crying for attention? There's probably 20 other ""progressive"" stores they can get a dress from instead. I bet they wouldn't raise a stink if a Muslim owned catering company declined to make a ham dish for their reception.

I want that syrup bottle. That would be a fun thing to own.

A legal document conferring rights to two people.

Professional victim mentality.
This is why I am just sitting back and laughing if we let Muslims take over.

>I should be allowed to bully people into providing goods or services

Just go across town to another bridal store. I actually used to support gay marriage before faggots started doing this. Now I wouldn't get upset if ISIS style squads started throwing you people off roofs live they do in the Middle East.

I looked it up. It's just a statue, not a syrup bottle at all. I'm sad now.

Because you're an AIDS-riddled faggot who deserves to be tossed in the bog.

...

>We’re Christian and we don’t believe in that; our faith doesn’t let us believe in that.

> 6 “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ 7 ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
>Mark 10:6-9

They must not know what a Christian is.

desu this all is a proper way of going about free speach.

The shop has the right to deny service due to faith
The lesbians have the right to make a public complaint

I don't see the problem here at all.
Also muh free market, a dress store probably contacted them with a discount offer

What exactly was your statement here?

The Muslim bridal shops would probably bludgeon them behind the shop instead of nicely declining their patronage.

wtf why does this conversation have to be framed within the 1st amendment. Do I have to pretend to be religious if I don't want to sell things to fags?

Oh darn, I'm stupid. I thought the couple said that not the shop owners. Reading comprehension problems here.

Not technically, but most people don't quite remember that whole Freedom of Association part of the First Amendment.

It's okay, we all make mistakes, friend.

Then get a civil union, you AIDS-riddled faggot. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and includes tax laws meant for raising functional children. Now please kill yourself.

They'll end up with free dresses from a commie-run store. Brilliant scheme on their end.

Child credits are rendered separately from marriage in American tax law.

Technically no. First amendment includes freedom of association, which implicitly ALSO includes freedom of disassociation, meaning you're not supposed to be forced to associate with people you don't want to.

The civil rights act is also unconstitutional, btw, for this reason

Yes do go on

>The dykes probably planned to get turned down from the start
There's a bridal shop in Pittston (Gerri Bridal Shop - Pittston, Pennsylvania), but no, they had to drive out of their way to get some press and start a row.

Where does the first amendment indicate freedom to discriminate?

see

all the syrup in the arm is going to be hard to get out.

You might have a point if you were arguing about access to utilities or life-sustaining services. As it stands you aren't so you don't have a point.

>discord
>gay
>associated with Sup Forums

This discord is literally the antithesis of everything Sup Forums stands for. If you go on this discord you dont belong here

Not that i think any store has any obligation to serve gays if they hold strong religious beliefs, but who the fuck is stupid enough to pull this shit after that one bakery got sued for doing the same thing? If not sued, they're certainly going to see a business decline once word gets around.

Mrs. Butterworth is THICC

Well if we allow people to say no gays in a bridal store who is to say no gays in a small town with one supermarket is wrong?

Convictions are worth more than money to them, obviously.

>you will never impregnate a thicc qt 3.14 syrup bottle
why even live?

I already pointed out why. You don't need a bridal store to get married.

Convictions aren't going to pay the bills.

Kys faggot..

A proper Christian would sell them the dress, then pray intently that they avoid the fires of hell!

I mean I think it is a dickish move to not allow people to buy wedding dresses but yes, not a huge hassle. That said, these sorts of people are liable to also refuse service to gays in places where it matters more like medical establishments and places that sell food.

When gays can refuse to serve Christians (we cannot FEDERALLY due to the Civil Rights Act) arguments about freedom to discriminate make more sense. Until then this is religious people abusing an old book to harm others.

I mean it says not to be gay but where does it say not to sell stuff to gay people in the bible?

It's hard to sell anything to anyone after you've put that person to death.

You ought to stop poking this particular bear.

Gays were never satisfied after forcing the government to acknowledge theur union, now theyre pushing tranny acceptance and softening pedophilia. You know that slippery slope thing you guys say doesnt exist.

If a small town would ban you why do you want to live there so much?
Maybe they should take the hint.

Marriage is a religious issue from the get-go, however. And you're trying to segue into points I already covered.

As for gays refusing Christians it's just as valid. However, if you force Christians into serving gays it only makes sense the reverse is true.

>Until then this is religious people abusing an old book to harm others.
Citation needed.

It doesn't say anything about harming or not selling things to gay people. Just that they are sinners and we pray for sinners.

>just bend over and let them win

>When gays can refuse to serve Christians (we cannot FEDERALLY due to the Civil Rights Act) arguments about freedom to discriminate make more sense
Reverse the civil rights act then you retard. I'm sure they'd be perfectly happy not being served by a fag if it meant they didn't have to serve fags.

Marriage licenses are obtained from a civil court.

Claiming that being religious gives you special privileges to discriminate when Christians are specifically (religious) a protected class makes gays second class citizens for factors beyond our control.

Ok great everyone is a sinner. Pray for us, that's fine but where does it say not to do business with gays?

Ok you let me know when that has happened.

I never said that. But this is their decision to make, and is what they have chosen.

Of course it won't happen, you faggots won't let it happen.

>like medical establishments and places that sell food.

If it's a private company or private hospital, they should be able to serve whoever they please. Though I think there are laws regarding medical services for emergency patients.

It's not special privileges. It's basic rights. That's why they felt compelled to remind you about the first amendment.

Look, I'm an atheist. But your argument is complete shit. And harping on religion just makes it worse.

And if you can get a marriage license from a civil court then you don't need a bridal store.

this time without the meme answer, what is the purpose of marriage.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association#United_States_Constitution

Christians will never let it happen. They love being protected by a law that they can abuse to fuck over other people not covered by it. If I refuse to sell a wedding dress because I don't serve Christians I can be fined and my store shut down.

As I said, it doesn't say not to do business with gays. It does say to put them to death, however.

Where does the first amendment grant a right to discriminate in offering services to the public?

>the text of the First Amendment does not make specific mention of a right to association

really made me think

see: They already pointed out they work under religious reasons. You're just going to have to accept it.

>It does say to put them to death, however.
I need a quote.

It also says not to mix milk and meat or wear multiple fabrics.

>Though I think there are laws regarding medical services for emergency patients.
Pretty sure NY has jewish only paramedics.

>I don't know how US law works

At least we won't have to put up with you for too much longer.

Leviticus 20:13

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Where does it say you need to supply someone a service if they ask for it?

>just straight up ignore the Supreme Court ruling which was the literal next sentence

Ok well if you have this freedom to discriminate, euphemistically titled "association", why can I not refuse to serve Christian customers at my bridal store?

Let the lezzers get married in overalls.

So lesbians are fine?

It doesn't. The concept of having a business open to the public means you agree to serve the general public unless a customer is disruptive.

Go ahead. No one cares.

>They love being protected by a law
They aren't protected at all.
You faggots, niggers and fucking cat ladies are the reason it'll never go away.

I don't think that meant that people have a freedom to discriminate which is the euphemistic intent of "freedom of association".

Yeah, everyone on Sup Forums should buy the dresses for their future wife there!

...

...

I cannot. That would violate the Civil Rights Act federally.

Providing a service to a fag wedding implies endorsement

Consider this: I theologically believe it is wrong to drink alcohol, so I do not even go to bars so endorsement of alcohol consumption can't be implied

Because of the civil rights act, which I already said is unconstitutional. You're using circular logic.

Christians are protected in their religious beliefs by the Civil Rights Act.

Then you should read the ruling.

That's not a law Christians want. That's a law you and your kind pushed through.

Wrong. Its not their religion that gives them authority to discriminate.

They are the owners of the business and the gay couple were on private property - the owners of the business can do as they damn well please and sell to whoever they want to.

The LGBT 'community' are the biggest hypocrits going. You EXPECT everyone to tolerate you and your beliefs / lifestyle choices, but when another person wishes their beliefs / lifestyle to be respected, you throw a hissy fit and start demanding shit.

Fuck off already.

>It doesn't.
There we go then, fuck off. They don't need to supply you.

>The concept of having a business open to the public means you agree to serve the general public unless a customer is disruptive.
Yeah that's a load of shit.

>Mark 9:42 - Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

Christians are not to abet or encourage others to perform sinful acts.

How does it imply endorsement?

If I bake a cake for the Church of Scientology as a bakery open to the public, does that mean I endorse Scientology personally?

Homos can't have kids so that's irrelevant.