Refusal to sell wedding gowns to lesb...

Refusal to sell wedding gowns to lesbian couple stirs debate in Bloomsburg

There are 141 comments on the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story from Aug 8, 2014, titled Refusal to sell wedding gowns to lesbian couple stirs debate in Bloomsburg. In it, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reports that:

A bridal store's refusal to sell wedding gowns to a same-sex couple is stirring debate in central Pennsylvania.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#2 Aug 8, 2014
So now it's not only people claiming that taking pictures or baking a cake is forcing them to actively participate in someone's wedding, it's selling ANYTHING to a gay couple?
lgbt is silly

Knoxville, TN

#4 Aug 8, 2014
Debate is all it will stir since there is no law that says they must cater to gays.
wills

Indianapolis, IN

#5 Aug 8, 2014
Why give 'em your money? The hell with 'em. Shop elsewhere. I wouldn't want a nickel of my money going into their pockets.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#7 Aug 8, 2014
I see a LAWSUIT coming and the shop owner losing like all of the other bigoted business owners!!!

I mean, really....selling wedding dresses to women who happen to be Lesbians is against God.....what a crock of crap!!!
Mikey

Los Angeles, CA

#8 Aug 8, 2014
Murdock wrote:
Wouldn't flannel shirts and work boots be more suitable?
I think a diaper would be more appropriate for YOU.
Mikey

Los Angeles, CA

#9 Aug 8, 2014
NorCal Native wrote:
I see a LAWSUIT coming and the shop owner losing like all of the other bigoted business owners!!!
I mean, really....selling wedding dresses to women who happen to be Lesbians is against God.....what a crock of crap!!!
Spot on!
Mikey

Los Angeles, CA

#10 Aug 8, 2014
lgbt is silly wrote:
Debate is all it will stir since there is no law that says they must cater to gays.
Not unless they've posted a right to refuse service sign, otherwise It's bigotry and discrimination. Good cause for a law suit.
Bubba Cooder

Alpharetta, GA

#11 Aug 8, 2014
Murdock wrote:
Wouldn't flannel shirts and work boots be more suitable?
No
.
Because you gotta wear pants
Shirvell s Shrivel

Philadelphia, PA

#12 Aug 8, 2014
Mikey wrote:
<quoted text>
Not unless they've posted a right to refuse service sign, otherwise It's bigotry and discrimination. Good cause for a law suit.
Doubtful in Bloomsburg.

The sign you mention would have nothing to do with the issue. You're mixed up.
Shirvell s Shrivel

Philadelphia, PA

#13 Aug 8, 2014
The irony here is that they're probably the only two lesbians in buybull belt PA who wanted a pair of Wangs....
Fliint

Flint, MI

#14 Aug 8, 2014
W.W. Bridal Boutique owner Victoria Miller told the newspaper that “providing those two girls dresses for a sanctified marriage would break God’s law.”

I'm confused. If it's a SANCTIFIED marriage, then by definition doesn't that mean it is approved by God? Sanctified = made holy so Victoria is saying that she won't sell to a holy and God-approved marriage.

Fa-Foxy makes a good point. What if some rich gal wants to buy a wedding dress for Halloween? Are these dresses magically blessed? What of bride and groom of differing faiths? Someone going for a second marriage after being divorced?

To the two gals who are getting married, remember that it's not about the dress, the cake, whether the ceremony is indoors or out, ultimately it's about the love you have for each other that really matters in the end.
Mikey

Los Angeles, CA

#15 Aug 9, 2014
Shirvell s Shrivel wrote:
The irony here is that they're probably the only two lesbians in buybull belt PA who wanted a pair of Wangs....
The only irony is that you refuse to see how repressed everyone is in the 'PA buybull belt"
Elizabeth Johnson

Falls Church, VA

#16 Aug 9, 2014
Lesbians are NOT in the Bible nor mentioned anywhere as being wrong.

What was said was it was against God or the displeasure of God for two men to lay together as two women.

It is BIOLOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for two women to lay together as a Man and a woman.

So when anyone uses the Bible or any scripture to say two women living together is against God, Immoral, Bad, or wrong, are wrong themselves.

I not saying Same Sex relationships are wrong or right.
Scripture only states that sex between two Men as they lay together as a Man and a woman is.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#18 Aug 9, 2014
Fliint wrote:
I'm confused. If it's a SANCTIFIED marriage, then by definition doesn't that mean it is approved by God?
It's why they couldn't purchase the wedding dresses. Only couples capable of a 'SANCTIFIED marriage' are welcome to shop there. You are confused, hope that helped..
Chance

Grove City, PA

#19 Aug 9, 2014
Elizabeth Johnson wrote:
Lesbians are NOT in the Bible nor mentioned anywhere as being wrong.
What was said was it was against God or the displeasure of God for two men to lay together as two women.
It is BIOLOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for two women to lay together as a Man and a woman.
So when anyone uses the Bible or any scripture to say two women living together is against God, Immoral, Bad, or wrong, are wrong themselves.
I not saying Same Sex relationships are wrong or right.
Scripture only states that sex between two Men as they lay together as a Man and a woman is.
And since it is biologically impossible for two women to lay together as a man and a woman, it is also biologically impossible for them to be married. The actual marriage is the consummation of the relationship, when two bodies join together as one. Two women cannot do that. That is why I say their "marriage" is a paper one only. It is a farce for them to have a ceremony in a wedding dress and demeans the symbol of the dress.

That said, that business owner should have learned from those who have gone down this route before her - gays and lesbians are nasty and vicious and looking for any reason to destroy those who follow Biblical teachings. BTW, while it is quite true that the word "lesbian" is not in the Bible, anyone with a mind and a heart open to the truth of God has no trouble understanding that sex between two women is wrong just as sex between two men is wrong. And I use the word "wrong" because it is clearly a sin against God as well as unnatural.
Truth

Minneapolis, MN

#21 Aug 9, 2014
The truth is that you are selling dresses, that's all. Don't think for a moment that your selling dresses is supporting marriage in any way. Most people overspend on their weddings hurting their marriages and financial futures. What you are doing being a leach on the "sanctity" of marriage.
Mikey

Los Angeles, CA

#22 Aug 10, 2014
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
And since it is biologically impossible for two women to lay together as a man and a woman, it is also biologically impossible for them to be married. The actual marriage is the consummation of the relationship, when two bodies join together as one. Two women cannot do that. That is why I say their "marriage" is a paper one only. It is a farce for them to have a ceremony in a wedding dress and demeans the symbol of the dress.
That said, that business owner should have learned from those who have gone down this route before her - gays and lesbians are nasty and vicious and looking for any reason to destroy those who follow Biblical teachings. BTW, while it is quite true that the word "lesbian" is not in the Bible, anyone with a mind and a heart open to the truth of God has no trouble understanding that sex between two women is wrong just as sex between two men is wrong. And I use the word "wrong" because it is clearly a sin against God as well as unnatural.
LOL, Yes two women and two men can join together and consummate a loving relationship. The only nasty and vicious THING is you, forcing your will on others, being self righteous, judgmental and preaching your false religion. BTW the 'Bible' has been rewritten so many times with the intent of crowd control there's no longer any truth in it and it's a plagiarized story of the Egyptian god Horus. So in other words YOU are clearly wrong to judge others by your arrogant misinformed ignorance and have NO clue about the existence of GOD or what his intentions are. You're clueless and only hurting society by trying to revert us all to your warped sense of paranoid values. So STFU!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#23 Aug 10, 2014
Mikey wrote:
<quoted text>
Not unless they've posted a right to refuse service sign, otherwise It's bigotry and discrimination. Good cause for a law suit.
Unfortunately LGBT is not covered in Pennsylvania's public accommodation laws, so they are free to discriminate against their customers based on that and that alone.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#24 Aug 10, 2014
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
And since it is biologically impossible for two women to lay together as a man and a woman, it is also biologically impossible for them to be married. The actual marriage is the consummation of the relationship, when two bodies join together as one. Two women cannot do that. That is why I say their "marriage" is a paper one only. It is a farce for them to have a ceremony in a wedding dress and demeans the symbol of the dress.
That said, that business owner should have learned from those who have gone down this route before her - gays and lesbians are nasty and vicious and looking for any reason to destroy those who follow Biblical teachings. BTW, while it is quite true that the word "lesbian" is not in the Bible, anyone with a mind and a heart open to the truth of God has no trouble understanding that sex between two women is wrong just as sex between two men is wrong. And I use the word "wrong" because it is clearly a sin against God as well as unnatural.
Actually 2 women (or 2 men) are much more likely to "join together as one" than a man & a woman who are completely different genetically, biologically, & emotionally.

Maybe that's why 50%+ of all hetero marriages end in divorce- basic incompatibility both physically & emotionally.
Augustus

Tulsa, OK

#25 Aug 10, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Unfortunately LGBT is not covered in Pennsylvania's public accommodation laws, so they are free to discriminate against their customers based on that and that alone.
As it should be! Way to go Pennsylvania!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 6 min Barbi A 201,865
News Sanders: Don't blame Islam for Orlando shooting 25 min Ismail 711
News Obama: Notion that being armed would have saved... 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 945
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 68,797
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr here 37,319
News Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 2 hr toabhah 36,047
2016 NOM DC March for Marriage FAIL 2 hr Mr Rogers 7
News Pope says gay people deserve an apology 2 hr Maggie 21
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 4 hr An NFL Fan 13,057
More from around the web