Sometimes gay activists are dumb. Such is the case of a group of gays who decided to protest a Canadian florist who won’t provide flowers for a same-sex wedding. NOM is, of course, using this as a cry of victimhood:
Homosexual activists have protested outside the home of a Christian florist in Canada because she will not provide flowers for a lesbian wedding. The protestors dropped flowers tied with rainbow-coloured ribbons on the front lawn of the florist’s suburban home, and demanded that she be hauled before the courts. The intimidating protest was sparked when the lesbian couple’s ‘wedding planner’ wrote about the Christian florist’s stance on Twitter. Florist Kim Evans runs her business from her home in Moncton, New Brunswick. She previously told the lesbian couple by email: “As a born-again Christian, I must respect my conscience before God and have no part in this matter.” Outside the florist’s home, protestors spoke to news reporters, claiming they were ‘spreading a message of tolerance’.
Okay, so, let’s break this down. The “Christian florist,” of course, needs to get a grip. Outside of the fact that she’s really not supposed to be denying people business based on her personal beliefs, she’s already in an uphill battle being a “Christian florist,” in a world where she has to compete with, um, gay florists. We already know that the Religious Right is going to turn this woman into a martyr for “standing up for her beliefs,” by not taking money for flowers at an event she doesn’t personally like. And yes, I realize that this woman runs her flower business out of her home, but it is still her home. So since they’re already going to turn her into a martyr, don’t help them.
Dan Savage is right about this:
Not cool.
[...]
As peaceful as this entirely legal protest was, I’m against making people feel uncomfortable or unsafe in their own homes. Even bigots. And staging protests outside people’s homes is a tactic usually employed by rightwing anti-abortion activists and the KKK back in the day. I don’t think this is a tactic that gay rights movement should endorse or adopt.
To bring this down to a personal level: I say a lot of shit that pisses off the religious right. I don’t want rightwing anti-gay haters turning up on the sidewalk outside my house, annoying my neighbors, and, most importantly, making my son feel unsafe in his own home. (Honestly sometimes I’m surprised that they haven’t; I’d even go so far to express my gratitude—yes, to the haters—that they haven’t.) Protesting outside people’s homes? I don’t think they should do that to us, any of us, and I don’t think we should do that to them, any of them. Not Tony, not Maggie, not these florists.
See, part of the reason that LGBT people and our allies are winning the battle for hearts and minds in the US, Canada and all kinds of other places, is that it’s fairly easy to look at the two sides and see who has the moral upper hand. Do we do lots of things that piss off the Religious Right? Hell yes. But the thing about it is that every time we do something, stage a protest, fight an unjust law, or whatever else, we need to be able to say “Not only were we right, but we fought it right.” And no, staging a protest at someone’s private residence is not cool, unless we’re talking about, say, The White House.
I mean, please, does this even look sensible? Imaging/messaging fail, guys.
Tags: Canada, fundamentalist christians are already martyrs anyway, National Organization for Marriage, New Brunswick, nom, protests, religious right16 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
I dunno – looked pretty peaceful to me. Laying down flowers – taking a picture of a flag and walking away. If all anti-abortion protestors did was that I would be ok with it. However they scream, intimidate pregnant women and cause violence.
In theory I agree with you and Dan but this looked pretty innocuous. Based on all the emotional violence that Christian religious extremists do to gay people in their own homes – I am not feeling too sorry for this lady or her ilk.
Comment by Eric in Chicago — March 29, 2011 @ 5:25 pm
Eric – your home should be a place of safety and comfort. Protest in the public square, in the newspaper, or somewhere else, but NEVER at someones home. Not cool regardless of how subdued it was.
Think about it this way, if the Klan showed up in front of your house to “protest you” by laying flowers and being creepy, you would call the police, right? Same thing. Leave people alone at their home no matter how douchey they are. Not Maggie, Not Brian, Not Perkins, Not Wildemon, not LaBarbera…none of the douches should be “protested” at their house. Ever.
Comment by Richard — March 29, 2011 @ 5:38 pm
I’ve often contemplated if people on our side for SSM think about how they act sometimes. If they realize that they are doing the same thing that anti-SSM people do to us. It’s so hard to determine sometimes what is too much or too little. I always want to be the better person, and have our side be the better group. And it gets difficult to hold back, very often. I also think it’s stupid for this florist to turn down business, but that also goes to show how much they truly believe in what they stand up for. To choose their religion over making money? That doesn’t happen often. Not that I am siding with them.
All in all, I think we need to stop and think about how we would feel if someone were to stand outside our home where are loved ones are also. I would never want my family to feel unsafe, or my neighbors to feel the same way.
Comment by Sandy — March 29, 2011 @ 5:39 pm
They should have ordered a gift basket of fruits, nuts and flowers for the woman and had it delivered to her home, along with a pleasant note on a rainbow-themed card. “It would violate our lesbian consciences before God to respond to your hate with anything other than good-neighborliness.” Let her think about that one.
Comment by Scott Rose — March 29, 2011 @ 5:48 pm
I’m with Eric, that was a very quiet and non-threatening “protest”.
Comment by Priya Lynn — March 29, 2011 @ 6:07 pm
Why does someone feel threatened by people leaving flowers on their lawn? I mean, I still wouldn’t do it but it’s not like they’re chanting or threatening or anything close to that.
Comment by Daniel — March 29, 2011 @ 6:19 pm
I feel violated when the missionaries come to my door. I feel violated when the @&$) religious groups that are exempted from “Do Not Call” ring my number. Home should be free from outside antagonism.
Comment by Brian — March 29, 2011 @ 6:23 pm
““Not only were we right, but we fought it right.”
I agree. On the macro level I think the battle has been waged legitimately (even though I disagree with some of the objectives); and those who are losing often display the very hate they are charged with. And I honor a movement that can do this in spite of the level of gross hatred you have experienced.
I am personally grieved and ashamed by how many who take the name of Christ have acted.
The only image I wish we could hold differently is this: If all this amounted to was a fight–I would agree that all persons ought be honored who engage the conflict in a way that attempts to be “right” in how the fight is waged. But I would rather see it like this–that we can live respectfully as neighbors–get up in the morning and agree how to walk through life together–AND wage our disagreements along the way.
An analogy: My mother is a conservative’s conservative. A friend’s mother is a liberal’s liberal. They are in the same town. In the same clubs. Both devout Christians. Both the heart and soul of their little town. And they disagree on this issue as well. But they walk in relationship and love.
Actually–I think this happens all over the place in the little corners of our lives. But when we get into the public realm it seems we frame everything as “knock-down-to-death” battle. This usually flags me that there are interests in the media (who define conversations) and politics (who define power battles) willing to exploit all parties and sides for reasons having nothing to do with the issue.
Comment by lovetruthlove — March 29, 2011 @ 6:45 pm
lovetruthlove, I’m not sure it’s really possible to walk through life together with people who want to take away your rights and send gay children to camps that confuse and shame them into being something they’re not. You have to realize that the stakes of this aren’t all lovey-dovey and that there are real world effects for this–especially on GLBT people.
Comment by Daniel — March 29, 2011 @ 7:22 pm
Im guessing these people learned nothing from the
Protesters that showed up at Bette and Tina’s house.
Comment by emma — March 29, 2011 @ 7:50 pm
Daniel–rather than speak about me or folks down at the local fundamentalist church or with signs on the news–what is your experience with real life people.
I personally (rightly or wrongly) get weary of this being a special issue whereby it is impossible to disagree without being in a category of subhuman haters.
My wife (i’m white and she is black) and I prepared for marriage in a church that opposed interracial marriage. Folks did not stop being our friends. Over time hearts and minds changed.
The very success of the gay rights movement has largely been due to gay persons walking in love with their families, coworkers, friends, etc. Sometimes this love only flowed in one direction. But I think it just doesn’t fit reality to think there has not been care in both directions.
The first gay person I knew who died from AIDS was in a church staunchly opposed to homosexual partnerships. And they held a large, celebratory service for him.
I know there has been frequent and profound hurt. But that does not mean the world is simply divided into two categories of good-evil people and right-wrong people; and that anyone who disagrees at any point of my thinking/commitments is on the side of the Devil.
Isn’t this exactly the kind of mindset that assigned gays to the side of Satan???
But just on the simple level–what is your experience with a range of friends in your life that hold different opinions, lead different kinds of sexual lifestyles, or have differing orientations? Can people only share life with you if their beliefs match up exactly to yours?
Comment by lovetruthlove — March 29, 2011 @ 10:05 pm
I do have to say that if flowers and flags were the worst this person has to deal with, she’s getting off pretty good. She isn’t having her house tagged with filthy language or being threatened with violence or punishment, or having loud music blasted at the house at three in the morning.
I’m not too sure I agree with the comparisons to KKK flags and nosy missionaries, either, because there’s a difference in that those are people in (historic, if not current) positions of power who are known to systematically oppress and spread lies about minority groups, whereas this is a minority group standing against a bigoted person, who supports a privileged oppressive organization. One is frightening because of subtle threats and oppression, while the other is frightening because oh noes the mean gay peoples disagree with my religious views.
Honestly, I can’t really bring myself to be upset about some (very pretty) flowers quietly placed on her sidewalk.
BUT!
I totally agree that bugging people while at home isn’t the best idea, because it is an invasion of privacy.
Comment by Makyui — March 29, 2011 @ 11:49 pm
Hatelieshate, quit trying to suck up to us so you can softpeddle your anti-gayness at a later time.
Comment by Priya Lynn — March 30, 2011 @ 12:39 am
The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada blog (activatecfpl) seems to have some email information I haven’t seen as extrapolated elsewhere. That may well be my oversight, but here it is. The post is written by lawyer Don Hutchinson:
“Before considering the florist’s response, let’s back up a few steps to establish a little more context. The brides were working with a wedding planner. The wedding planner recommended a florist. The brides decided they would find their own.
Then came the email from the owner of Petals and Promises that has been provided by someone to the media ; or, at least the first of the two paragraphs in the email was provided because the media has not published the second paragraph. Below are both paragraphs:
When I first received your e-mail regarding your wedding, I was assuming it was a heterosexual marriage, as there was nothing in your e-mail to indicate otherwise. On that basis, I agreed to undertake your order. Now that you have brought to my attention that that is not the case, I am choosing to decline your business. As a born again Christian, I must respect my conscience before God, and have no part in this matter.
I know for certain that Maggie’s Flowers in Riverview does gay weddings. She gets her flowers from the same supplier that I would be getting them from. I don’t expect she would be too busy this time of year with Valentine’s Day well over with. I believe that Maggie’s will do a good job for you and her prices are reasonable.
I don’t know about you, but I found this to be a very respectful email that accommodated the brides’ request without inconvenience.
The bride replied a few hours later:
That is fine, I’m a Christian as well and although I believe we all have the same God, you have your own beliefs. I’ve found another florist and will share your position with those that I know so that you will not be bothered with any future business.”
Permit me to correct NOM first. The New Brunswick Human Rights Commission is not a court.
That having been said, it is my understanding that only people who can file a legitimate complaint with the Commission are the recently married couple.
Now Canada’s religious right is screaming about the ‘activists’ not having a permit to march.
Fight it right – well said.
This has become an internet/media driven fiasco.
Comment by Bene Diction — March 30, 2011 @ 2:39 am
Priya
Big assumption. Big fear. Big stereotype. Big conclusion.
You sound, to me, like you are quite capable–at any point–of dissecting my words and saying, “I agree with X and Y but vociferously disagree with Z.”
I will not visit the site and command that you or anyone else do, say, feel, think, or believe anything. I request the same courtesy.
The majority of my adult relationships have been with women who take swimgs at me because I am a man; with black persons who take swings at me because I am a white; with liberals who think I am too conservative; with conservatives who think I am too liberal; with Christians who think I am anti-religious; with atheists who think I am too religious; with gay persons because I am straight. But these are my friends– who basically say–”But don’t take it personal. I know you love me–and the issues that really apply to you, personally–we’ll work out.”
A blog comment section isn’t designed for personal relationships of trust that can accomodate the “good, bad and ugly” about each other. We’re kind of stuck with sharing our perspectives.
The great thing is that we can do so anonymously and with complete freedom. So why not make the best use of a limited medium–and share about our lives, our beliefs, and that which we care about with each other? Why not leave the assigning of motives, labeling, assinging of names and commands alone?
Comment by lovetruthlove — March 30, 2011 @ 3:26 am
[...] gay right activists say the flower laying was ill-advised – a home has to be respected as a safe place. The florist and the couple have remained [...]
Pingback by Riverview New Brunswick in an internet firestorm over wedding flowers | Bene Diction Blogs On — March 30, 2011 @ 4:57 am