ADF Defends Barronelle Stutzman from Anti-Religious Hostility

Case here that ADF took is a famous case of a florist in Washington, who Washington State happily serves gays, anybody else, and would not, however, make cake for a gay wedding. I keep doing a cake, would not make a floral arrangement for the wedding because it's an event that she doesn't believe in. I don't believe in it either, and we have, uh, I mean, there it has nothing to do with anti-gay. It has to do with the belief that marriage is defined as a man and a woman. If you don't think we're right, fine. I'm going to a dinner, as I said, two men married to each other, very close to They know my position on same-sex marriage. It would never occur to them I'm anti-gay. It's the cheapening of language that the left engages in in order to stir hatred in the country. So why didn't the Supreme Court simply say to the Washington Supreme Court, as we've ruled in the case that I keep thinking of, the, the cake baker in Colorado, You cannot, uh, you cannot force this woman to make a floral arrangement for this event. Why didn't they do that?

Yeah, well, usually when the court sends a case back, that's exactly the message they're sending, is you got something wrong here, go back and fix it consistent with what we did with Jack Phillips, the Colorado baker. And I think that's what made what the Washington Supreme Court did all the more galling, is that they rejected that. And rather than reconsider the case, rather than give Barronelle a fair shake and rule for her consistent with the ruling for Jack Phillips in Colorado, they copied and pasted and issued the almost exact same decision against her once again. And I think that goes back to the religious hostility that is underlying a lot of this, that was in Jack Phillips' case and these other cases, where it's a simple, "We don't like your belief, and we're going to make you suffer for it." And all Barronelle is asking is, let me operate my business, that I serve everyone. And she even says to this day she would love to welcome this gay couple back in her shop and sell them anything they want, as long as she's not forced to participate and create floral arrangements for weddings that violate her faith.

That it's even a case shows the deterioration of America in my lifetime. No matter what your position, the issue is a freedom issue. So has she suffered as a result?

Absolutely. She has obviously been subject to terrible, vile attacks on her that have required her to take extra precautions and threats that she's received, and even her business has been impacted by it. And so this is something that's not just a academic legal battle. It's her life. And hovering over all of this is that if she loses and the ACLU comes after her for the over a million in attorney's fees, they can come after her business, they can come after her house, they can come after everything she and her husband own. And so this is truly a fight for her very livelihood and everything she's worked her life for, all over her very polite declining to do a specific event for a longtime customer that she loves and continues to love to this day as a good friend.

That part I find hard. I can't stand the guy, okay? I don't understand how she could possibly love him. She treated him perfectly decently for how many years, and then he screws her life. I can't stand this man. I think he's a lowlife.

It's completely a testament to the character of Barinell.

Well, she's got a better character than I do.

I loathe him. She truly does not. Loves him to this day, and I've seen it in her eyes of tearing up of the thought that she would love to have him walk back in the shop and give him a hug. And I've heard that from her own lips. I mean, it just shows that this is, like you said earlier, this is not a thing where she opposes Rob and his lifestyle, but rather it's standing true to her religious beliefs while still continuing to love Rob and his partner and Anyone that walks in her shop.

I don't know how he justifies to himself, this woman has treated me so well, and now I'm trying to destroy her, her husband, and their livelihoods. I don't know. I mean, he is a hate-filled human being. You don't have to react. I'm telling my audience. There are very few people I loathe. This person that she loves, I loathe. But what are you going to do? I don't think— I believe love is earned. She doesn't. It's a separate question. It has nothing to do with you or ADF. So this is now— where is it now legally?

So we are back at the US Supreme Court once again asking them to correct what the Washington Supreme Court did once again, to say, don't just send the case back, but give Barronelle a clear ruling of her ability to live out her faith. and it's part of ADF's larger battle that we've representing other creative professionals like her that have gotten relief, in Arizona and Minnesota and other states where, where people like Baranell have gotten victories and been able to go on to their life. And that's what we're seeking at the US Supreme Court now on behalf of Baranell. And by the generosity of so many people that are listening and, and have supported her, we've been able to do this free of charge. Um, so she never has to worry about paying a cent of ADF's legal fees. Um, we're honored to stand with a woman woman like this.

Well, I'm honored to support you, Matt Sharp. Thank you so much. And let me please ask you folks, I mean, if this does not compel you to give, nothing will. Good people are divided into 3 groups: those who fight, those who help the fighters, and those who do nothing. Just help the fighters. Go to the ADF banner at DennisPrager.com.