Inne Receives Flack For Same-Sex Marriage Policy

NORTH ABINGTON TOWNSHIP — A controversy brewing in Lackawanna County is sparking quite a few comments on Facebook. A banquet hall in the Abingtons is turning away same-sex couples who want to have their wedding receptions there.

An email written by a staff member at the Inne of the Abingtons in North Abington Township has gotten a lot of attention on Facebook overnight. It’s been shared about 1,000 times.

It has to with the facility’s policy of not hosting same-sex wedding receptions. It’s a policy you could say was essentially irrelevant before same-sex marriage became legal in Pennsylvania but now it’s raising a lot of questions.

The Inne of the Abingtons near Clarks Summit has hosted weddings and other events for decades. The owner said hundreds of negative comments they’ve received overnight are blown out of proportion. It all has to do with an email a staff member sent a potential client, a same-sex couple from Lackawanna County.

It states, “unfortunately, we do not hold same-sex marriages at our facility.” The writer politely suggests other wedding venues.

When this email was posted online, many of the responses haven’t been so polite either condemning or supporting the Inne of the Abingtons for its policy.

Wedding planner Danielle Pasternak of Scranton was one of the first people to share the email on Facebook that garnered dozens of shares and comments. She said the policy of “no same-sex weddings” is not only in bad taste, but also a bad business practice.

“I just feel like there are a lot more cons that go along with this decision for them than pros for them. It hurts a lot of people. It hurts a lot of their feelings by going this route. It’s their choice that they’re going this route but it doesn’t mean that there won’t be repercussions at the end of the day,” Pasternak said.

The economic repercussions may be real since there’s already an online movement to boycott the Inne of the Abingtons.

But, Wilkes-Barre civil attorney Barry Dyller said the venue will not face any legal repercussions for its policy and the couple won’t be successful if they fight it.

“The federal and state laws which prohibit discrimination in public accommodations like a wedding venue do not protect sexual orientation. So, they probably do not have any rights. It’s a shame, but they probably do not have any rights,” Dyller said.

Dyller said that municipalities can pass their own anti-discrimination laws for same-sex couples. He said there are only 33 municipalities in Pennsylvania that have such laws, including the city of Scranton and the city of Pittston.

People Newswatch 16 spoke with said they understand why some are upset.

“I think that it’s really unfortunate because all couples should be able to get married regardless of whatever their orientation is. They should be able to do what they like, if they’re in love,” said Danielle Dwyer of Dalton.

The staff at Inne of the Abingtons are referring same sex couples to other area wedding venues.

In the meantime, there has been a flood of comments about the policy online, both in support and against Inne of the Abingtons.

One woman wrote: “I am so very glad my fiancee and I did not put a deposit down yet. Because of their refusal of the same sex ceremony, we will not be having our ceremony here. It is your choice not to support it, and it is my choice not to support a very closed minded business!”

Another posted: “I support same sex marriages, but I also support this small business’ right refuse business based on their values. They could not have been more polite and respectful in their letter refusing service. You don’t like it, go to a different venue. I had a great time at their facility last time I was there.”

“I have a mixed opinion on it because I feel like it’s their own personal preference and we’re all equal. We all should have equal rights as human beings, but as the owner of the Inne of the Abingtons, legally they do probably have the right to set rules like that,” said Stacey Trunk of Factoryville.

Whether they agree with the policy or not, people said they are not sure taking a stand will be good for business at the Inne.

“When they hear about this, that they won’t let them get married there, they’re gonna lose some business I would think,” said Jerry Philo of Dalton.

122 comments

  • Mary

    You know what? Everyone here is doing exactly what someone wanted when they posted that email refusal. Now it’s all out there and this all anyone can talk about. Think about it. So what, who cares. Tomorrow it will be another story and the same with the next day. The world keeps on revolving, time doesn’t stop. Move on.

  • Deb mican

    In the 1960’s black Americans could not sit in the front of the bus with the whites, blacks could not use the same restrooms as whites, blacks could not eat in the same restaurants as whites, all man made rules. Whites could not marry blacks, or let alone marry outside their religion or be shunned. White men could rape and beat blacks and all that was supported and considered ok. Times change, our new generation is smarter than our older generation as they can see a future that encourages happiness and love not ignorance and hatred. Brave individuals stand up for the rights of those who face discrimination, ignorance and hatred. If they didn’t we would be a society of segregation and barbarians.

  • Mary

    Ya know, if you believe in God & the Bible then we are all going to hell because man (and woman) kind were created from incest. Think about it…we started with Adam & Eve who had children who then had children. Here’s the thing…who did Adam & Eve’s children mate with to have their kids…EACH OTHER!!!! Just saying.

      • PaCitizen

        I believe that she is talking in the sense of , that Christians claim this is a sin, yet we came from sin “incest” Although that is not entirely true. I was born into a christian family, i believe there is a god, I believe I am still a christian. But what I do not agree with is the fact that people marrying the same sex should be a sin.

    • Joe Schmoe

      So my argument stands? So people in support of incest should have equal rights? The line in the sand is so confusing. Someone please make up my mind. For it is confusion.

      • Mary

        Wow, that’s what you got from that statement. And people are wondering what’s wrong with this world today. Wake up people. There are more important things to worry about. Move on.

  • Winston

    I applaud Inne of the Abingtons for not allowing themselves to be BULLIED into doing something they don’t agree with. Bullied by people who will otherwise tell you that people have the right to live their lives as they please. Why would “open minded thinkers” want to publicly pressure and bully Inne of the Abingtons to operate their private business as they see fit? Shame on those who don’t think Inne of the Abingtons owners should run their private business in accordance with their own opinions and beliefs.

    • Asher

      When you open a business to the public, you agree to serve that public. You actually sign several documents to that effect, (promising to abide by non-discrimination laws and the like) If he wants to use his religion as a basis for who he will and will not associate with, he needs to run a church or private club, not a public business.

    • Jim

      For one thing, we should all just throw away our dictionaries, as apparently words no longer have meanings. Progressives, unable to win societal arguments based upon the merits of their beliefs, instead must resort to the redefinition of words — like “marriage” to mean that which it clearly was NEVER intended to mean.

      Secondly, apparently only those who tow the politically-correct line are entitled to their own beliefs. Those who dare disagree with the “progressive” mantra are quickly silenced and/or crushed beneath the full weight of governmental regulation, “educational” indoctrination, and/or the vengeful, oppressive wrath of the “tolerant” liberal media.

      As I have been saying for more than twenty years, the only thing about which the left is tolerant is itself. If you want to see discrimination, stand up for Biblical principles and watch “progressives” come out of the woodwork to attack you — as evidenced by what previously happened to Chic-A-Fil and Duck Dynasty, as well as that which is currently happening with Inne of the Abingtons.

      Lastly, the left isn’t content with merely engaging in and openly flaunting a sinful lifestyle, but they demand that everyone else APPLAUD them doing so.

      If a person wants to defy the commands of the Lord God (as we all do in many respects on a daily basis) that’s between that person and God. But such certainly has no right whatsoever insisting that everyone else accept and applaud his or her sin. I will not.

      The only response to sin which the Lord accepts is shame and repentance. Those who flaunt their sin are not exhibitive of either shame or repentance.

      One who can separate belief from action believes in nothing. Belief that is not acted upon is not belief. I will never be forced to accept (much less applaud) that which is in clear defiance of the revealed will of God — government regulations and/or societal ostracization notwithstanding.

      • MathhiasBarnabasIII

        I think you’re confused Jim. Marriage used to have zero to do with religion at all and was all about using a woman as a medium of property trade. So it has evolved before and should be allowed to continue to evolve.

      • Maria

        But Jim, you are forgetting that not everyone is a Catholic/Christian/believes in the “Lord”. People who aren’t Christian aren’t “flaunting their sin” because it isn’t a sin to them.

      • Jim

        I guess Merriam-Webster dictionary is junk, as it defines marriage as “: the relationship that exists between a husband and a wife, a similar relationship between people of the same sex ,a ceremony in which two people are married to each other” But according to this other Jim, these words somehow clearly have some kind of intent to mean something else. I didn’t realize words could have clear intent to do anything besides be words.

        This other Jim makes me ashamed to even share his name. Like most religious people in this country he is quick to make sure to play the victim here, and explain how oppressed he is. Or at least how oppressed he thinks he is. Fact is, these overzealous religious people oppress society as a whole, thanks to their outdated ideals and beliefs. These are the types of people that dispute scientific fact because it doesn’t fit nicely with the bible. These people would be happier in the Bronze Age…less science to get in the way of things, plus more people then would believe in boogeymen like the devil, or hell to keep them in line.

        When I was growing up, I went to Catholic school. I learned that Jesus was all about love and acceptance. Jesus would go hang out with the prostitutes when everyone else shunned them. Jesus was a good guy that preached love above all. He loved so much that he even forgave those who hung him upon the cross. Today’s Christians can’t even forgive gay people for wanting to get married and having zero effect on the Christian person’s life.

      • Jim

        ” I learned that Jesus was all about love and acceptance. Jesus would go hang out with the prostitutes when everyone else shunned them. Jesus was a good guy that preached love above all. He loved so much that he even forgave those who hung him upon the cross. Today’s Christians can’t even forgive gay people for wanting to get married and having zero effect on the Christian person’s life.”

        I love it when people quote (always out of context) something they apparently do not believe — like the Bible, taking a single passage (or small selection of passages) out-of-context in an attempt to promote a doctrine, in clear contradiction of a multitude of other passages which most emphatically declare otherwise.

        I have seen this done throughout my life by those who either have no concept of Biblical truth, or simply choose to ignore it because such doesn’t coincide with their personal beliefs of how things are or should be.

        Jesus clearly stated that He did not come to do away with or change the law (i.e. Mosaic Law — which clearly condemns homosexuality), but fulfill it. And Jesus never winked at sin. Yes, He freely and most compassionately forgave repentant sinners (emphasis on “repentant”), but never condoned the actions of the unrepentant.

        Sadly, I hear many today, particularly among the media, who seem to be under the impression that Jesus was a feeble, indecisive milquetoast who winked at and/or overlooked sin as something occasionally annoying, but nonetheless entirely acceptable, and nothing about which anyone should be overly concerned.

        To all such persons who believe that Jesus condoned (or was even tolerant of) sin, I can state quite emphatically: You have never actually read the gospels, much less the rest of the New Testament.

        Regarding “hell” — 16 of the 24 occurrences in which hell is mentioned in the New Testament are the words of Jesus — which prompts me to ask, if there is no hell, why did Jesus mention it so frequently? Why did Jesus warn people to stop sinning, repent and flee from coming judgment if there is no judgment and that God would just overlook their sin?

        Before anyone makes an assumption about Jesus, I suggest they first read His word.

        As far as reading the Bible goes — I have not only read, but intensely studied the entire Bible in both Greek and Hebrew — every single line of it — including the textual variations of the Greek New Testament, the Greek Septuagint and the Hebrew Old Testament (including the published transcripts of the Dead Sea Scrolls). Please don’t tell me what words or passages mean. If you believe that Scripture endorses or even condones homosexuality in any sense you are misinformed (likely through a website or book which promotes your ideology and is likewise ignorant of the Scriptures).

        Regarding another comment about me “judging” others, that is a complete misrepresentation of what I said (as clearly elaborated in my initial post), where I plainly stated that each one has to answer for his or her own actions (including me). My contention (which apparently many have missed, or chosen to ignore) is with those who expect me to APPLAUD and CELEBRATE behavior with which I am in disagreement, then intolerantly and most vehemently become hostile when I don’t.

        Believe what you want, people. I don’t have to answer for you; you do. Just don’t expect me to stand up and cheer your behavior (or any behavior) with which I am heartfelt and complete disagreement. I don’t expect (nor even want) you to cheer my beliefs, so please, kindly reciprocate the sentiment and don’t get so bent out of shape when I refuse to bow and worship at the altar of political correctness.

      • MatthiasBarnabasIII

        To whomever gave my comment a thumbs down…go research the roots of marriage. Matrimony is your sacrament. You can’t even get marriage benefits and aren’t considered married by society without the secular legal marriage license.

      • Jim

        I love it! I love how you twist things around to fit what you want! Jim, since you were all about the correct definition of words in your first post please show me where I QUOTED the bible. Seeing as how a quote would be defined as “to write or say the exact words of (someone)”, where did I write the exact words of the bible? Oh that’s right, I didn’t…I described events written about in the bible. And, according to you, even though I was in Catholic school for 13 years my studies of the bible mean nothing now since I don’t “believe”. Also, I like how you infer that my knowledge must be from some web site, rather than my 13 years of Catholic education. Interesting, it’s almost as if you want to distract from the core of my argument to make yourself look better, or seem more correct.

        I’ll state it again: Jesus was so accepting and forgiving that he forgave those who hung him on the cross! You say that ” He freely and most compassionately forgave repentant sinners (emphasis on “repentant”)”, but yet this isn’t the case with those who hung him on the cross! The bible itself even says so, (here’s your quote from the bible) as Jesus said “Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing”…how could these men repent? Jesus even said they do not know what they are doing. Again, Jesus could easily forgive the people who killed him, yet the followers of Jesus in modern times can’t forgive two people for being in love.

        Don’t get so bent out of shape when I refuse to bow and worship at the altar of hatred and ignorance.

      • Jim

        “I’ll state it again: Jesus was so accepting and forgiving that he forgave those who hung him on the cross! You say that ” He freely and most compassionately forgave repentant sinners (emphasis on “repentant”)”, but yet this isn’t the case with those who hung him on the cross! The bible itself even says so, (here’s your quote from the bible) as Jesus said “Father, forgive them for they do not know what they are doing”…how could these men repent? Jesus even said they do not know what they are doing. Again, Jesus could easily forgive the people who killed him, yet the followers of Jesus in modern times can’t forgive two people for being in love.”

        Firstly, how much of your “Catholic” education took you into the actual Greek and/or Hebrew? The Bible was not written in English (or Latin for that matter). Did you study all of the Greek and Hebrew textual variations? The Masoretic, Dead Sea Scrolls, Septuagint (with various variations thereof), as well as the Greek variations between the Received, Critical, Majority texts, etc?

        And where does the text anywhere imply that Jesus’ words of “Forgive them, they do not know what they are doing” is in reference specifically to those who crucified Him? Fact: It doesn’t. It’s a general reference towards all of mankind, lost in the sin, who did not recognize the moment of visitation.

        Even if one were to accept your premise of the intention of Jesus’ words from the cross (which the textual evidence does NOT support), you would have to dismiss ever other of the multitude of instances throughout not only the gospels but all of Scripture which clearly state that there is no forgiveness apart from repentance.

        But as you choose to rather selectively misquote Scripture (because it does not conform to your preconception as to how things should be in YOUR world), it will do me no good to debate this further. Jesus also instructed His believers not to cast their pearls before swine. We are to proclaim the gospel freely, but when it is rejected, we are to wipe the dust from our feet and move on.

        I am moving on. Thank you. Have a nice day. :)

      • Jim

        Thanks again for ignoring my argument and proving my point. Most modern Christians, like yourself, are close-minded bigots. And one more thing, Mr. Bible Scholar, where does the bible mention the word homosexuality? And where does it say it is a sin? Oh, that’s right…it doesn’t! The word “homosexuality” or anything like it is not mentioned once in the bible, in Greek, Latin, English, or Chinese. All you have are vague passages open to interpretation, and since they are open to interpretation we have hateful bigots like you twisting them until they fit what you believe.

      • JenniferT

        Sorry. I don’t care to buy in to your favorite bed time story. That doesn’t make you better than me, or me better than you. But when you run a PUBLIC business, you don’t get to choose the sexual preferences of your customers. Do you research each customer to find out if they’re into S & M, or costumes, or wearing diapers as foreplay? What people do in their bedroom doesn’t give you any right to deny them the right to buy whatever product or service you’re selling. If you sell wedding receptions, then sell them to whomever wants to buy them and keep your nose in your own bedroom.

    • justsaying

      So what if instead of a gay wedding, this was an interracial couple or maybe a disabled couple or 2 people of a different religion? What if the facility refused to serve you for whatever reason. Discrimination is wrong period.

  • Joe Schmoe

    I guess my biggest question is, where do we draw the line? We’re talking about equal rights. FINE. I get that. My question to the pro-movement people is this. WHERE DO YOU FOLKS DRAW THE LINE? That is a fair question that deserves reflection and a rational answer. Are you in support of polygamy? Incest? Pedophilia? Beastiality? Child molestors? Rape or murder? If you say yes, what do YOU value? If you say no, then you are no different than any of us who are standing our ground and saying that same sex marriage is wrong. Just think about what I’m asking for a little while. Where do YOU draw the line?

    • MathhiasBarnabasIII

      “Are you in support of polygamy? Incest? Pedophilia? Beastiality? Child molestors? Rape or murder?”

      Why do you people always go into such stupid directions with this? The only one that holds any water in your argument is ploygamy. The rest have absolutely nothing to do with love and marriage. They have to do with sex which is where you always bring the argument to strawman. Technically as long as polygamy is between all consenting parties, even if I don’t understand it, I have no reason to stop them. The rest don’t involve marriage or consenting adults. So your argument is a pathetic attempt to act like you have a moral high ground.

      • Scran Tony

        You are a shining example. Business with you , all said and done ,wouldn’t be profitable. They would have to charge you considerably more. Then the sht hits the fan anyway. It is a lose/ lose situation.

      • Joe Schmoe

        I’m not talking about love. I’m talking about equal rights. The equal rights movement of the 60’s WAS NOT about love. So I’ll take my moral high ground and raise you another straw. Since you believe this is only about love and not equal rights, which OBVIOUSLY the inne of the abingtons article is about, lets look at the others. You believe those are about sex. Deviant sex. Fine. Mental illness for sure. EQUAL RIGHTS! I’m not advocating them. Just looking for the line in the sand. So if you want to debate, lets debate. You will not win with me.

      • MatthiasBarnabasIII

        Even from the equal rights angle my logic wins out. Who are you to decide that a certain type of consenting adult(meaning it rules out almost everything you mentioned still) relationship gets to have marriage rights? Two consenting adults in a gay relationship or multiple adults in a consenting polygamist relationship should have the same exact rights as any straight consenting relationship. So go ahead and debate how that’s wrong.

      • Joe Schmoe

        I’m not saying that is it”s wrong, I just don’t support it. And actually, I’m not really saying anything, I’m posing a question. Where do we draw the line? This is to ruffle some feathers. A man loving a cow, in the future, will be no different than man-man or woman-woman relationship today. This is true, if things keep going in this direction. So go back and re-read my original post a THINK about it again before responding again. Where’s the line?

      • MatthiasBarnabasIII

        Well you are wrong again. A cow can never give consent or have a relationship with a human the way two humans can. So I’m not sure how you made any point at all?

    • Asher

      The line is exactly where it was always drawn, consent.
      Children and animals cannot consent, therefore it’s not a civil rights issue, it is forcing yourself on someone or something incapable of informed consent. The definition of rape revolves around consent, so I don’t think I need to explain the difference there, ditto murder. That’s what makes your “Argument” absolutely weak and pathetic, along with the entire “Slippery slope” process. The line has been clear for some time. The line is, was, and should be, Consent.

    • Deb mican

      To Joe Schmoe,

      If you truly have an opinion be a man and put your real name behind it. Otherwise be quiet.

      I am certain you have friends or family members who are gay, or you have been served in a restaurant or cared for at a doctors office or hospital by a gay individual. So if you are truly that ignorant to bring up beastiality, rape, and other idiotic issues you truly need to get your head out if the sand and look around.

      • Joe Schmoe

        Wow, so much hate from so many people is support of “love”. I have family members who are gay. I’m not dogging them. I’m asking where it all ends. There’s always another “movement”. Right or wrong, good or bad. Why would anyone put there real name on an Internet forum, Pro or anti is just plain stupid.

    • Conrad Wiser

      The most logical place for a government to draw the line would be one male and one female since there are two sexes and that’s what it takes to produce new citizens, normally. Otherwise there is no reason to deny marriage to more than two loving consenting adults, the same arguments for same sex marriage would apply to marriage between any number of people. But if that’s not possible then it would be better for government to not be involved with marriage at all and to support unmarried equality instead of granting special rights and privileges to one faction of society which used to be justified by the benefits that marriages between a man and women would contribute to the society.

  • Me

    God created Adam and Eve. Not Adam and Steve !!!

    If they want to be gay let them go to Colorado. They seem to be getting away with everything. They smoke pot in public, might as well have the “Back door” policy go there too. This country is an absolute disgrace to the Bible and the constitution. I hope when a civil war or world war 3 breaks out all the countries gang up on the USA. This country is just plain no good !

    • MathhiasBarnabasIII

      What an absolutely loving Christian you are! It amazes me how you think pot is so evil yet I see every God-fearing American drunk out of their minds constantly when it’s more toxic to the body (and this comes from someone who has never and will never smoke pot)

      Thinking the country needs to be destroyed because you hate homosexuals is borderline mental illness.

      • Joe Schmoe

        Ya, I’m not for “the movement”, but I don’t think the country needs to be destroyed because of it.

    • Lisa

      I guess you chose to skip over the whole “Love Thy Neighbor” part, huh?
      So many “Christians”.. so full of hate… I cant imagine thats what Jesus wanted.
      Pretty sad when Agnostics understand your religion better than you do….

      • ME

        It sounds like you’re the one who doesn’t understand. Loving your neighbor, doesn’t mean you have to approve of things they do and say or even like them. There is no hate in that. The hate is in your mind.

  • Jim

    Yeah, all those gay people who use only Monopoly money, apparently.

    The people in fantasy land are the religious idiots who fuel all this hatred, even though god is supposedly all about love. That’s Fantasy-Land Extreme.

  • Tony Mascaro

    GOD ALMIGHTY alone institutes and blesses marriage. How can we as a society become so twisted in believing that marriage between 2 men or 2 women is just. It is just, it is just wrong.Supreme Courts never have and never will override the Kingdom of Heaven. We as a people have become so brazen that we can not rationalize and reason with genuine insight. This is a biblical fact regarding the day we are now living in. Because of our hardness GOD ALMIGHTY will take away our ability to reason righteously. Truly he will frustrate the intelligence of the intelligent and destroy the wisdom of the wise. Just as GOD ALMIGHTY hardened the heart of pharaoh because of his stubbornness so he will do also to this blinded generation. It is happening it is at our doorsteps. Jesus Christ said that he does not give as the world gives. And also scripture states that if we become a friend to this world we become an enemy of Gods. Wake up oh sleeper rise from the dead and Christ will shine on you.

    • Jim

      “biblical fact”…hahah…oh man, that’s quite an oxymoron! You sound like a raving lunatic, and likely you are one because you believe in fairy-tales. Good news is: the younger generations don’t believe this garbage, so lunacy like this will eventually go away.

      • Tony Mascaro

        Yo Jim. 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1Timothy 1:10 refer directly to homosexuality. Check it out. Might want to check 2 Timothy 3:1-9, good stuff. John the Baptist baptized with water but it was actually a baptism of repentance.This is in Mark chapter1 verse 4. This is good stuff regarding repentance. Jesus Christ was questioned by religious leaders about marriage at the resurrection, they were trying to trap him in his words. This is in Matthew chapter 22 verse 23-33 the argument makes references to traditional marriage no gay quotations whatsoever, check it out. Im somewhat baffled by some so called agnostic scholars who are stating things that hold no water whatsoever. Bible supporting slavery. Give me a break ever hear of Moses and the exodus from Egypt. Or how about racial prejudice.Bible never has condoned such a thing.But for some reason the scholars are confusing mans flesh with mans choices.Sorry not the same thing. And you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know the difference. If you read the bible open mindedly not carelessly it is amazing what God may show you. God has called all mankind to repentance.because all have sinned.

      • MatthiasBarnabasIII

        Here you go oh self-righteous one; every mention of slavery support in your holy book:

        Leviticus 25:44
        “Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves.”

        Titus 3:1,
        “Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good.”

        Titus 2:9
        “Teach slaves to be subject to their masters in everything, to try to please them, not to talk back to them”

        1 Peter 2:18
        “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.”

        Col 3:22
        “Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord.”

        1 Cor 7:21-22
        “21 Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so.
        22 For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord’s freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ’s slave.”

        Eph 6:5
        “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.”

    • MatthiasBarnabasIII

      Yeah…you see there is a little but of a problem with saying that any ‘god’ is the authority on marriage…what problem is that you ask? Well, the basic institution of marriage existed before even Judaism. It was more about using a woman for bargaining rights when giving her away. You see that what marriage has become has definitely evolved since then, so religion does not get a monopoly on its evolution.

      • Tony Mascaro

        Nice rebuttal but it doesn’t hold any water. All that states is that slavery existed. Not that it was condoned by GOD, that was a man thing.Key phrase according to your verses is1 CORINTHIANS 7:21, if you can gain your freedom do so.

      • MatthiasBarnabasIII

        Do you also try and rationalize like that when the Israelites killed everyone in ‘their’ holy land? Or when they took the women like property?

        Also the Bible is supposedly God’s Word and my first verse is God telling the writer to tell readers where they should go get their slaves by that logic.

    • Daniel Foster

      Of all the thousands of deities thought of by humans since the beginning of time, you have complete certainty and proof that you choose the correct one and it exists without physical evidence. Congratulations and good for you.

    • Lisa

      You might want to rethink the location youre living in. Surprisingly, Pennsylvania is interested in being part of the 21st Century. If youre such a God-Fearing, hate-filled, discriminatory slackjaw, you might want to try the other side of the Bible Belt. (Thats South if you didnt get the memo.)

  • Ellie

    I am surprised how many people mentioned this is bad for business. Maybe this businessman puts his ethics ahead of financial gain.Also, he is not judging anyone or hating them. It is just that a christian cannot condone any sin. Sure, we all sin, but we don’t condone it. It is unacceptable in 2014 that anyone be denied their religious rights.

    • K Walker

      This is mullarkey. We are afforded religious freedom so that the government cannot force religious views on its people, not so that we can protect others that discriminate based on religion.

      • Jim

        Before people quote the Constitution, they really should read it: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

        What about “prohibiting the free exercise of” do people not seem to understand?

    • MatthiasBarnabasIII

      You’ll notice most of the supposed anti-homosexual verses used to support that viewpoint usually include language like ‘do not lay with a man like a woman’. When you read this in the frame of reference of the time period, it says don’t treat a man like a woman due to the fact that women were still treated as property for the most part in that time period.

      Why’s it so hard for you believers to follow Jesus’s pretty simple rule of loving your fellow men and women and treating them as you want to be treated?

    • Warlock

      “Religious rights?”

      The guy runs a BUSINESS, not a CHURCH.

      The couple wanted a RECEPTION, not a WEDDING. They’d have already been married in a CHURCH CEREMONY by the time they got to this guy’s venue. (Some churches do that!)

      • Jim

        Where does the Constitution qualify religious rights as only being applicable to persons when they are in church? Belief and worship of God has absolutely nothing to do about WHERE it is done, but WHY, HOW and FOR WHOM it is done.

    • ME

      Thank God there is someone on here who understands. Only one little correction, we don’t know that the couple was turned away due to what the owners believe, religiously. It’s also amazing how so many here made that argument. Shows their own prejudices. As for the “money” thing. I wonder if all those economic wizards thought that maybe this business might lose more “straight” business by allowing a gay couple to come there. Ever think of that?

      • MathhiasBarnabasIII

        Funny that being accepting of everyone but those whom wish to control via faith makes me butthurt. The only confusion i have is your absolute certainity being gay is wrong when the same ‘holy book’ supports slavery, keeping women as second class citizens, and incest.

      • MatthiasBarnabasIII

        If I had the time, I’d easily pull up Bible verses supporting all 3 of the things I brought up but I don’t feel like reading through them again to find the verses. Anyone who disagrees with what I said about the Bible hasn’t read it cover to cover.

  • Johnny D.

    The new “America” : agree with the gay mafia or be destroyed. Is that really freedom? This is what happens in a Godless society. Congrats to The Inne of the Abingtons for having a spine. A spine is a rare thing these days.

    • MatthiasBarnabasIII

      Let’s turn back time on your comment to just a short time ago when you’d most like say:

      ‘The new “America”: agree with the interracial marriage mafia or be destroyed. Is that really freedom? This is what happens in a godless society’

      And honestly, we are a society of endless gods and religions that all have a equal right to worship…until it effects others and their beliefs.

  • Umm really?

    They could have just said they were booked, but they used they opportunity to express that they don’t approve. Foolish move! Since the owner is a Christian, does that mean he’ll also refuse Jewish, Hindu, or even (GASP) Muslim weddings?

  • boobybobs777@gmail.com

    Im actually proud of this protest …they think its blown out of proportion but i guess they don’t like people bigot against them … doesnt feel so good does it . doesn’t feel good to have people hate you for your beliefs . Protesting is sadly the only way things get done in this country . i dont think they realize how many people are actually gay. and how many people have a gay loved one or best friend this is offending almost everyone ..

  • wtf

    I deal with costomers on a daily basis. Some of them aren’t the type of people I would care to be on the same elevator with but, I run a business and I don’t feel I need to condone their life choices to take there money. Excluding any group of people because you don’t like what they are is just bad business.

  • EequilRites

    I don’t get how as a business they would willingly turn away paying customers. And if this type of discrimination is legal in PA, then there definitely needs to be a change made to the laws. When I was engaged, I was thinking of having my wedding here, but the reviews (especially those related to the owner’s attitude/conduct) made me think twice. He doesn’t sound like someone who should be in a customer-oriented industry.

  • neutral party

    They were polite and professional in their refusal. I encourage people to be polite and professional in their rebuttals. I will say I think it is better to be honest that they would prefer not to cater a same sex wedding instead of agreeing to something they are against and inadvertently ruining the day for the couple. I will say if I contacted a Kosher catering hall I would not expect to be able to have bacon wrapped scallops. No matter how much I wanted them.

  • Fratboy

    Do they receive public funds? They have a right to deny service to whomever they wish. Why do we all have to fold to the whims of others? If an outrageous biker gang rolled in, does this business have to cater to them? I know, a bad example.

    • Shewhoblogs

      ” They have a right to deny service to whomever they wish. ” Actually no they don’t. Change the word “gay” to “African American” or “disabled” and you would probably change your tune. What if the Inn were antiwar and refused to marry a veteran or active duty military? Would you feel they were still morally correct in “not folding to other people’s whims”?

      • Fratboy

        If I am not welcomed, someplace, I would look elsewhere. If I had to resort to legalities to gain access to this establishment, would it be an event worth remembering. Would my reception be warm and inviting, or cold and would I really want to eat the food that place served me and my party?

    • Lisa

      Businesses do NOT have the right to refuse service to whoever they wish. There are state and Federal laws in place to prevent that, however, sexual orientation is not -YET- included. Modern society and thinking will change that.

      Would you say the same thing if they were refusing service to a Black couple?

  • PaCitizen

    Yes it is a big deal that this place forbids same sex marriages from happening here. I am personally good friends with quite a few LGBT individuals, and they happen to be the nicest people in the world, probably better than have of the straight people that i know. I hear so much how individuals marrying people of the same sex are going against God. Honestly they are hypocrytes. They sit there, they lie, they judge, they curse, and probably do MORE sinful things than anyone else. Yet they sit there and say this? I am sorry but this is sad world that we live in if people have to fulfill their lives just by judging others!

    • Mary

      “I am sorry but this is a sad world that we live in if people have to fulfill their lives just by judging others!” Did you really just say this?! Isn’t that exactly what you are doing to this business owner. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. If you don’t like it just go somewhere else. Why does everything and everyone have to be so dramatic?!

      • MatthiasBarnabasIII

        Yes. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. Supporting outdated and judgmental beliefs that effect other people being treated equally is in poor taste. And once again, no business bshoukd enter the realm of human faith because it is a separate institution in a secualr society. If you so your job according to the standards of deceny and you’re god still condemns you to hell I’d say he’s a pretty crappy deity.

      • ME

        Thanks for weighing in Mary. I agree with you. Drama seems to be the name of the game nowadays. Probably a bunch of wanna be “celebrities” looking for their 15 minutes or people like MathhiasbarnabasIII, who can’t accept views different from their own.

      • MathhiasBarnabasIII

        Wrong ‘Me’. I am only pointing out the law of the land. All men are created equal. You’re religious rights end when they interefere with and effect anothers. Pretty black and white. I respect everyone’s rights as long as they don’t chnage/effect any one else’s

Talkback 16 Online Discussion:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s



Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27,802 other followers