Landscapers Cause Furor by Shunning Gay Clients

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/11/us/11landscape.html?ex=1163912400&en=74b5c961b5f28a3a&ei=5070&emc=eta1

Last month, a local landscaping firm prompted a furor here by telling a gay couple in an e-mail message, “We choose not to work for homosexuals.”

The message quickly made its way around the Internet, and the company, Garden Guy Inc., was bombarded with threats and hate mail. But since then, the company’s owners say they have gained far more business than they have lost.

In an interview Friday, Sabrina Farber, 34, co-owner of the company with her husband, Todd, 37, said the company had picked up $40,000 in new business in the past two weeks, while losing only two clients worth about $500 each a year.

“I’m not saying that to gloat,” said Mrs. Farber, who described the frenzy as ugly and emotionally draining. But she said they would not do it differently and deserved credit for not masking their refusal with excuses.

“Why can’t people handle it when you say the truth?” she said.

[jgraz]

1. I really hope gays decide to stop doing business with them

May they quickly find themselves in need of a new dentist or car mechanic or favorite restaurant.

[liberaltrucker]

2. Alas, we still have a LONG way to go

:cry:

[Warren DeMontague]

3. Yay! Good for you!

It's about time someone made those gays mow their own damn lawns! :crazy:

[aquart]

4. Who can object to letting bigots deal with bigots?

Unless, of course, you're against segregation?

[petronius]

5. $40,000 in new business, huh? Only her banker knows for sure,

but my bullshit detector is pegging the needle...

[gardenista]

8. So is mine. They have already established themselves as liars.

They claimed to be members of a professional organization to which they had not paid dues.

I've checked their website. Their work looks sub-par.

For them to have turned this into some kind of marketing ploy is abominable.

[acmavm]

6. What's the answer here? I certainly can't see anyone being able

to make these idiots be decent and fair. I certainly cannot see any reason why any gay person would want to do business with them. And apparently the Fred Phelps fan club is flocking to do business with them. If they're telling the truth about all the new business (I say IF because it just seems really crazed to me that people would be that petty and mean spirited that they would flock to do business with someone on the basis that they will not work for/with gays) that says something very bad about the people in that area.

[pepperbear]

7. Hey this story is over a month old!!!!! I am SO GLAD IT HAS LEGS! n/t

[gardenista]

9. You know, I'm curious as to why it re-grew some.

Maybe it got "fertilized" by the owners of the company. Something smells here, because the spin on this story is essentially that a small business has emerged through a firestorm of controversy.

[readmoreoften]

10. Agreed. /nt

[gardenista]

11. The more I think about it, the more this smells.

I bet they're angling for interviews on all of the evangelical talk shows, etc.

This, to me, seems like they've hired a PR firm to rehabilitate their reputation, and decided to turn this "adversity" into gold.

I followed this story the first time around. They sure are looking better in this new iteration. "Why can't people handle the truth", indeed.

[readmoreoften]

12. I'd put my money on that, too. /nt

[pepperbear]

15. I saw that too and it's a good point, but may I offer....

it still puts their original intent to discriminate in the limelight. They're now simply trying to polish a turd. If they did get some $ to take it on the road, then bravo! So did that cute little girl duo, Prussian Blue, currently residing in the "where were they even then" file.

this isn't even about marriage or equal rights. this is the generic brand of hate; "we don't like to work with their kind." Yeah, they have the right to work with whomever they want, but this crap serves to keep the dialogue going, and regular middle of the road folks will start to say "we don't do business with people who don't do business with (insert minority here)".

This spin will only work to their base.

[gardenista]

16. Ok, I'll buy that. I just wish the Times had done some more leg work

to get a more balanced set of quotes in the story.

[pepperbear]

17. touche. the press makes hay out of any opportunity and access is the almighty. n/t

[keopeli]

13. Who are their new clients? Probably their church members trying to defend them.

Their fear manifests itself in different ways, but it always blinds them.

What other classification would be tolerated, much less promoted by actually choosing to do business with a prejudicial company?

“We choose not to work for coloreds.”
“We choose not to work for sick people.”
“We choose not to work for pedophiles.”
“We choose not to work for murderers.”
“We choose not to work for gays.”
“We choose not to work for atheists.”
“We choose not to work for hippies.”
“We choose not to work for liberals.”

[gardenista]

14. You know, $40K in new business is not that big a deal in that industry

If they are installing gardens of any complexity, $40K is nothing.

They are obviously using this "notoriety" for free advertising.

This story had died down weeks ago, and now it suddenly re-appears.

What a shame that the NYT has taken the bait.