Letters: Many arguments for supporting Arlene's are invalid

July 17, 2013 

Many arguments that appear to have validity on the surface are flawed in their logic upon closer examination. Another look at Arlene's situation.

Jewish delis (and Muslim food sources, for that matter) don't have a market for pork and (under the laws of supply and demand, at the very least) don't carry it. Asking for pork no matter your race or sexual orientation would be futile; "We don't carry it." Arlene's, on the other hand, has flowers which appeal to everyone no matter the race or sexual orientation. The law is quite clear; businesses can't discriminate based on certain criteria, sexual orientation among them.

Putting the gay/straight screen up as a condition for doing business with a customer -- whether or not "deeply held beliefs" are involved -- is no different than putting up the black/white screen. Segregationists invoked "deeply held beliefs" about God and religion into their arguments, too. They lost the legal battle.

Arlene's seems to have two options at this point. The first would be to close the shop since she chooses to not follow the law. The second would be to hold her ground and pay the legal penalty and fees for breaking it.


Tri-City Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service