Posted on 11/24/2013 5:08:56 AM PST by reaganaut1
WASHINGTON — A New Mexico law forbids businesses open to the public to discriminate against gay people. Elaine Huguenin, a photographer, says she has no problem with that — so long as it does not force her to say something she does not believe.
In asking the Supreme Court to hear her challenge to the law, Ms. Huguenin said that she would “gladly serve gays and lesbians — by, for example, providing them with portrait photography,” but that she did not want to tell the stories of same-sex weddings. To make her celebrate something her religion tells her is wrong, she said, would hijack her right to free speech.
So she turned down a request from a lesbian couple, Vanessa Willock and Misti Collinsworth, to document their commitment ceremony. The women, who hired another photographer, filed a discrimination complaint against Ms. Huguenin’s studio, Elane Photography. So far, the studio has lost in the courts.
There are constitutional values on both sides of the case: the couple’s right to equal treatment and Ms. Huguenin’s right to free speech. I asked Louise Melling, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, which has a distinguished history of championing free speech, how the group had evaluated the case.
Ms. Melling said the evaluation had required difficult choices. Photography is expression protected by the Constitution, she said, and Ms. Huguenin acted from “heartfelt convictions.”
But the equal treatment of gay couples is more important than the free speech rights of commercial photographers, she said, explaining why the A.C.L.U. filed a brief in the New Mexico Supreme Court supporting the couple.
“This is a business,” Ms. Melling said. “At the end of the day, it sells services for photographing weddings. This is like putting up a sign that says ‘Heterosexual Couples Only.’ ”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Freedom of Speech was intended to be “weighed”.
Gay people feel the need to bully back after years of bullying in school. Of course the silly savages don’t have the stones to do it without a lawyer and fag politicians to instigate.
Had they stood up to bullies as kids, perhaps they would be normal today.
So if you own a business you loose your right to choose who you want to service? Even more hillarious is the gay agenda is fighting for marriage and the obama regime is offering them higher premiums than if they were single.
just do the photography service but catch the ugliest images
Whatever happened to, “No shirt, no shoes, no service...?”
And what about Freedom of association.
“This is a business,” Ms. Melling said. “At the end of the day, it sells services for photographing weddings. This is like putting up a sign that says ‘Heterosexual Couples Only.’
That’s the way private business should be if they wish. What is to stop us from forcing landscape painters to paint portraits? Can I go to McDonald’s and demand pizza?
What’s to stop us from forcing newspapers from writing the stories we want?
In America, you only lose you’re rights if your work for a living; well, except whether or not you work, you have to buy Obamacare. And, in America, the government monitors all of your conversations and financial transactions.
FORWARD!
“accept the job but do it poorly”
The 2 depraved women desire to have the photographer use her artistic talent to ‘celebrate’ their confusion of natural law, and by default, give her approval to such. The photographer could use her talent to not “do the job poorly”, but to express her POV by photographing them in a negative context, through camera angles, editing, picking their nose, etc. The photo shoot could be used as an opportunity to express her views of sodomite behavior. Then again, the whole situation is classic libtard in your face “you are GOING to support this depravity or else”.
Regarding “no shirt, no shoes, no service,” the government decides what is and what is not permissible for you to discriminate. Right now, the government is allowing you to discriminate on the basis of shirts and shoes. You should be thankful.
I am forever bringing that up but not many others do. It's almost like it's the forgotten right.
The photographer turned down the job to photograph the "homosexual activists!" It is pure and simple that these two homos who most likely promote "equality" were intent on having a Christian photographer bow to their homo god!
The bad news is how it self-corrects.
Link to the full-text Free Republic thread.
What if it were a black photographer not wanting to shoot a KKK wedding?
Freedom of Speech was intended to be “weighed”.
…I forgot to put “never”.
“never intended to be weighed”. Big word to forget.
what if they hired a Muslim cook to make Pork chops for the wedding dinner?
Myself, I wouldn’t want to hire anyone who were forced to do the job. Seems like the people would be less than happy and do a piss poor job.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.