Posted on 11/20/2014 8:56:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind
A California photography company has announced that it will no longer shoot wedding photography after gay activists protested against the business claiming it "denied" service to a same-sex couple for their wedding.
Nang and Chris Mai, the operators of the Bay Area-based Urloved Photography, posted to the company's website earlier in November that they'll no longer photograph weddings after they were harassed by LGBT activists for referring a gay couple seeking their service to another photographer instead of shooting the wedding themselves.
The Mais, who specialize in weddings, events and family portraits, say they've had to do away with wedding photography because they don't want to sacrifice their personal beliefs against same-sex weddings in order to abide by California's buisness discrimination laws.
"We have come to a difficult decision that we will no longer be in the wedding photography business," the married couple posted on the company's website Nov. 4. "We are grateful for this experience as it has caused us to think about how our personal beliefs intersect with our business practices."
After T.J. Kelsall posted on Facebook about how Urloved Photography declined to photograph the wedding for him and his partner, Thai Lam, the Mais received a backlash in which they were "flooded with hate calls, emails and accusations that inaccurately depict [their] business."
"Great shots but this company denied me and my fiance, a same-sex couple, from their services," Kelsall's Facebook post states. "Stand up and say something about it."
Although the Mais didn't say it was due to their religious beliefs that they didn't want to shoot the same-sex wedding, they told the couple that "photographing a gay wedding is not the best match for us."
In response to the hateful criticism from LGBT activists, the Urloved Photograpy website statement explained that the Mais felt that referring the couple to another qualified photographer, who has no objection to same-sex weddings, would have resulted in the couple being happier with their photograpgy service.
"Unfortunately, our artistic passion for excellence and personal beliefs were misinterpreted. That was never our intent," the statement says. "It is not photographing a couple who have different personal beliefs that we have difficulty with. We genuinely felt referring this couple to a photographer who does share their personal beliefs would provide them with the best service for their special day. We wanted to connect them with someone who did share their personal beliefs so that they could give them the service quality they deserve."
While it's unclear as to whether Kelsall and Lam threatened a lawsuit, another post by Kelsall indicates that it was acknowledged that their denial of service could be pursued further. Under California law: "all persons are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments, including both private and public entities."
The state of New York also has a similar law to California's. Earlier this year, a Christian couple was fined $13,000 for declining to host a same-sex wedding on their farmhouse wedding venue.
"They acknowledged that if this were pursued any further it wouldn't fair [sic] well for Urloved Photography," Kelsall wrote. "They understand the law and told us they have decided that in light of their personal beliefs they will be shutting down their business."
Although the gay couple was initially upset with the Mais' decision to not shoot their wedding, Kelsall also wrote on Facebook saying they respected their decision to stop doing wedding photography and asked gay activists and their supporters to stop posting to Urloved Photography social media and Internet accounts.
"[We] consider this issue resolved and would urge you to stop posting on their FB page, Yelp, and any other social media site," the Facebook post states. "Our friends, family, and the LGBT community/allies have all been amazingly supportive and active in helping to bring this matter to light. We must respect that Nang and Chris have decided to shut down their business because of their beliefs. I wish the outcome could have been different but it is what it is."
RE: I still don’t understand how photographers, bakers and other private businesses can be forced to participate in events against their will
It all started with Civil rights laws.
The reasoning goes like this — It is not lawful to deny a service to people because of the color of their skin.... therefore, it is now extended to — “It is not lawful to deny service to people because of their sexual orientation.”
Once you equate skin color to sexual orientation, all bets are off.
About 15 years ago, they had a same sex marriage proposal on the CA ballot. A ‘gay friendly’ co worker asked me my opinion. I stated that I didn’t really care if two gays got married, and it certainly wasn’t a threat, to my marriage. I went on to explain, that I would be voting against it, because it would only be a matter of time, before refusing to have anything to do with a gay wedding, would become a hate crime.
She kind of scratched her head, and had to admit, I was probably correct. Sometimes, it stinks, being right.
RE: She kind of scratched her head, and had to admit, I was probably correct.
So, 15 years have passed, what does she say now?
How long before straight couples can’t find anybody to shoot their weddings because, “Sorry, we’ve stopped doing weddings because of the gays”?
Haven’t seen her since 2010, but it might be worth looking her up, and ask ;)
Simple: We do weddings for friends and family only and we don’t charge for them. If they choose to tip us our usual fee, well, that’s their business. Oh, and we have LOT’s of friends, many of whom we haven’t met yet.
RE: Oh, and we have LOT’s of friends, many of whom we haven’t met yet.
Gay couple response: “Can you be our friend?”
All of these businesses need to start advertising their services for free, but would accept donations. I wonder if they could be forced to do business with gays then?
Thing is, though, people shouldn't have to lie. And if they're refusing based on being Christians, then lying is against their religion just as much as participating in a gay wedding is against it. It would also be against their religion to purposely do a bad job by taking lousy pictures. So the Christians are really stuck here, and have no choice but to stop doing weddings altogether.
We need to bring back the right for private businesses to refuse service to anyone, for any reason. Anything less than that, and we're not free.
Only a matter of time....that voting against something will be a crime.
Can the KKK force a black photographer to shoot their rallies?
Good point !
Unspoken er...um “portraits...in wedding clothes”
Ask loudly and often "which one of you is the bride?"
I’d stay away from the issue with her. It’s reached a point where one has to be extremely judicious in how they address this topic - you can quickly become vilified in so many ways. My personal approach is to realize that we are in a zero-sum game and have to take stand - we just need to be effective in those moments.
"Alrighty then, here are your costumes."
Vile perverts destroy more people’s livelihoods .
No problem. It's a dying industry. Everyone with a phone can take a selfie with the happy couple and others can get the whole thing on .mp4.
Good idea - thanks.
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.