Hate crime against same-sex marriage
According to Ford (2013) Barronelle Stutzman, who is a florist from Washington, intentionally refused to supply flowers to a couple planning to get married due to the fact that this was a same-sex marriage. The florist, who was familiar with the couple since they were regular customers prior to their wedding, said that she was not going to provide the flowers to the couple because of her relationship with Jesus Christ. This event led to subsequent lawsuits against the florist. The florist is faced with two lawsuits; one from the same-sex couple whereas the other one came from the state attorney general.
According to Jessica (2010) marriage between individuals of same sex was legally recognized in the District of Colombia way back in 2009. As a result, marriage certificates became public for all homosexuals on March of the following year. Despite this, Barronelle Stutzman went against the state laws on the basis of her religious beliefs. Individuals who are stereotype usually try to establish a seemingly valid reason behind their behaviours and the case above is a typical example of the same. According to Herek (2009) reasons for given by individuals who are stereotype for their hate crime is usually based on individual opinion and worldviews which do not necessarily have valid basis. From the case above, the florist gives an excuse of faith as the reason for failing to provide services for the same-sex couple. To a large extend, this is an invalid reason. While Christianity may be against same sex marriage, the federal laws however protect the right of the homosexual community and this is regardless of an individual’s religion, race or ethnicity.
The issue of two contradicting rights can sometimes be difficult to handle. On one end, Barronelle Stutzman, who is a Christian, has the right to choose certain beliefs. One the other hand, the homosexual couple also does have rights of association and rights to marriage regardless of their sexual orientation. However, according to Gates (2015) the law does not allow the violation of one right at the expense of another law. As such, there needs to be a system that allows the integration of both laws.
In summary, there is still a lot that needs to be done in order to ensure that the rights of the homosexual community are perceived in a manner that puts them in par with other laws. The society needs to understand that the magnitude given to violation of other laws like murder should also be applied to the violation of rights of the homosexual individuals. The case above is a typical example of hate crime. There is no valid reason against the homosexual couple that wanted to do a wedding. The florist clearly states that she was not going to provide the flowers because of her faith. The florist clearly violates the rights of the homosexual couple. She display hate towards the couple despite the fact that they have been regular customers in her shop.