The Shelby County winery that was shamed on social media Friday for declining to host a same-sex wedding and then urging the couple to patronize its business made an about-face late Friday night and declared its premises will be “inclusive of all people.”

The owners of the Cat-n-Bird Winery in Chelsea said they made their decision after talking with the LGBT community but added that they still hold their religious beliefs against same-sex marriage.

The winery faced backlash on social media after a Talladega County woman posted an email to Facebook showing the winery refused to hold her same-sex wedding and then urged the woman and her fiancée to patronize the business.

“Been trying to find words for this since yesterday. There really aren’t any other than ignorance is alive in Alabama. Especially at Cat-n-Bird Winery,” Jennifer Ellison wrote in a Friday post that went viral.

Ellison posted an email she received from the Chelsea winery where the business told her they don’t “do same-sex marriages here” and then sent her a link to LGBT-friendly wedding venues in Alabama.

Still, Cat-n-Bird Winery then extended an invitation to Ellison and her partner to help celebrate its two-year anniversary further down in the email.

“All that being said, we would still love to have you both come out, enjoy some wine, listen to some music, and relax with us,” the winery said.

Been trying to find words for this since yesterday. There really aren’t any other than ignorance is alive in Alabama. Especially at Cat n Bird Winery. Posted by Jennifer Ellison on Friday, April 5, 2019

Ellison’s post had 215 comments as of 6:45 p.m. Friday, most with the sentiment that Cat-n-Bird Winery displayed chutzpah by suggesting Ellison and her partner spend money at their business after rejecting their lifestyle.

“We believe that Jesus frowns on gay marriage but loves capitalism,” one commenter wrote. Another added, “We won’t do your private event because Jesus, but please come spend your money to support us at a public event?!

Around 10:30 p.m. Friday, the Cat-n-Bird Winery announced its change of heart.

“We have been enlightened by many of our friends in the LGBTQ community as to how hurtful that decision was. We hosted open dialogue and gained insight from community LGBTQ leaders to understand our decision and the impact it has had on the community. We never meant for our ‘no’ to inflict pain or rejection, and for that we are incredibly sorry,” the business said on its Facebook page. “At Cat N Bird Winery, we want to be inclusive of ALL people, regardless of skin color, sexual orientation, gender or any other factor. Therefore, our original no – is now a yes for anyone interested in considering Cat N Bird Winery for your event.”

The Chelsea winery said its reversal “is not being made out of fear of revenue loss, nor are we shifting any religious beliefs by changing our policy. The decision at the end of this very hard day was simple – we want to be an all-inclusive venue that welcomes everyone.”

Two years ago, my wife and I fulfilled a dream to open a winery at our residence. Our dream was to share our love and... Posted by Cat-n-Bird Winery on Friday, April 5, 2019

LGBTQ individuals are not covered under Alabama’s discrimination laws, meaning Cat-n-Bird Winery was within its rights when it initially refused to hold Ellison’s wedding.

There also aren’t broad protections for LGBTQ individuals on the federal level, although the federal government and federal contractors can’t discriminate based on sexual orientation in employment matters.

Ellison’s post was reminiscent of two similar cases involving same-sex weddings and potential vendors.

In June 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. The court made the Colorado Civil Rights Commission – the state’s body for determining discrimination cases – reverse its decision that ordered the baker to made the cake because the commission did not “maintain religious neutrality” and was hostile to the baker. But the court did not rule on the wider issues in the case such as discrimination and freedom of religion.

Later that month, the court sent a similar case involving a Washington state florist to that state’s supreme court in light of its ruling in the Colorado case.