Christian Prosecuted: Refused to Photograph Homosexual ‘Commitment Ceremony’

National Catholic Register ^

[No Dems 2004]

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — As a Christian, Elaine Huguenin is against efforts to legitimize same-sex “marriage.”

So, when the Albuquerque photographer was asked via e-mail in September 2006 to photograph a “commitment ceremony” for two women, Huguenin declined. That was the end of the matter, she thought.

But Huguenin didn’t take into account New Mexico’s anti-discrimination laws. Instead of hiring another photographer, one of the lesbians, Vanessa Willock, filed a civil complaint against Huguenin’s company, Elane Photography.

Now, in one of the first cases of its kind in the state, a three-member tribunal of New Mexico’s Human Rights Commission is considering the complaint brought forward by New Mexico’s Human Rights Bureau, operated by the Labor Relations Division of the state’s Department of Workforce Solutions.

The tribunal will decide whether Huguenin should pay actual and punitive damages to Willock because of her decision not to take pictures of the homosexual ceremony.

Established in 1969 by the New Mexico Legislature to enforce state law preventing discrimination based on race and gender in employment, housing and public accommodation, the human rights commission is taking its first steps to incorporate a 2006 expansion of the act to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.”

[Resolute Conservative]

Whatever happened to “we reserve the right to refuse...”. My company that does not take any federal $$$ will do what I say.

She should have shown up and used a 1970 polaroid camera.

[gidget7]

Let them know I am praying for them. They absolutely did the right thing. Let's face it, there are many different reasons for any company to not take a particular job. It does not constitute discrimination. Frankly, to keep our children out of situations that might be dangerous for them or get them into trouble, or doing the same things for ourselves, are just two instances when we SHOULD discriminate. Discriminating is not a bad word, the left has remade the word not a bad word. Discriminating is the same as evaluating a product or situation, and deciding it isn't right for you, or that it is. It is making your own choices. And it is both proper, and necessary!

[Ron in Acreage]

What if it was a straight hispanic couple who wanted her to video them in a Santeria ceremony while they slaughtered some animal, and she said no way?

Is that also discrimination against a persons religion?
We need to stop the madness.

[RicocheT]

I can see the value of protecting one’s right to a job, or housing or entering a hotel or restaurant, but the right to make someone take your “wedding” pictures? When so-called rights are taken to the absurd, it cheapens the whole argument of personal rights.

These two should have looked in the phone book for another photographer, instead of filing a law suit.

[Recovering_Democrat]

You will comply and approve of the gay rights agenda in the world. Or you will pay dearly.

[WVNan]

Had I been the photographer that would have been some VERY expensive pictures, or.....I would have had other appointments that day. My son tells people that he doesn’t do weddings. He has no prices posted. If someone comes to him who has lots of money to spend, he suddenly finds that he can manage to fit it into his schedule. More than one way to skin a cat.

[Leftism is Mentally Deranged]

I suspect that this was a setup. They are disgusting. The day is coming when ministers and rabbis are arrested and JAILED for reading things in the Bible that remind us that that sort of behavior is not natural.
That day WILL come. Almost here.

[Polybius]

How is this not denying her the free exercise of her religion?

It is.

She should file a Federal lawsuit for violation of her First Amendment rights by the State of New Mexico.

[TontoKowalski]

Can an observant Jew turn down work just because an event occurs on the Sabbath?

I don't know what the law is... but I certainly think he's within his rights to do that.

[TBP]

Ve haff vays of makink you zupport zee homosexuall agenda! Ja!

[Wallace T.]

Under current law, an observant Jew, or for that matter anyone who closed their business on a particular day, such as a Sabbath-keeping Christian (the owner of Chick-Fil-A, for example), could not be charged with discrimination because no one is served, irrespective of their race, religion, sex, marital status, etc. However, I do not doubt that the Left will continue to “push the envelope” in these matters as their power increases.

[whynotwhy]

No really to No Dems 2004 but to anyone with the same line of thinking. The problem is that she (the photographer) is incorporated, and because she is she needs to be held to the same anti-discrimination laws as any other corporation. Any corporation that discriminates is asking for a lawsuit no matter how big or small. Imagine if Microsoft said that they will not longer do business Christians, see how that would be a problem? Just because she is a small business owner doesn't make her exempt from the law. As long as sexual orientation is a protected class she must provide equal services. The odd questions here are A) Why do some lesbians want some woman who obviously does not want to take pictures of them to do just that, and B) Why did this woman tell them that was the reason she didn't want to do the job, why not just say she didn't have the time? Both parties are equally stupid.

[TBP]

Totalitarianism in America.

[Alouette]

Can an observant Jew turn down work just because an event occurs on the Sabbath?

Jerry Seinfeld sued a real estate agent who would not show him an apartment on Saturday. He lost.

[LiteKeeper]

INTREP

[Brilliant]

I don’t think it’s in this story, but it was in another one published earlier.

[Jacquerie]

I agree. Fast forward 50 years and nonprofit Catholic hospitals are forced to perform breast augmentations on boy to girl wannabees. The left is slowly wringing out all that was good about America.

[Amendment10]

With respect to Elaine Huguenin's personal convictions, somebody needs to remind New Mexico bureaucrats that Jefferson noted that freedom of religion is our most sacred right.

"The constitutional freedom of religion [is] the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights." --Thomas Jefferson: Virginia Board of Visitors Minutes, 1819. ME 19:416

Given that the state requires Huguenin to pay punitive damages, I hope that Huguenin presses her 14th A. "button" to have the federal Congress come down on New Mexico with respect to the unconstitutional abridging of her 1st A. protections.

Also, Romans 1:25-27 tells us that same-sex sexual relationships are a consequence of idolatry. In other words, such relationships are a consequence of disobeying the 1ST COMMANDMENT, a major aspect of the GREATEST COMMANDMENT, to love the jealous God with all your being.

Homosexuals need to keep in mind, however, that the good news of the gospel is not about how God despises same-sex sexual relationships. In fact, 1 Corinthinas 6:9-11 indicates that certain members of that church had been slaves to such relationships but had been cleansed in Jesus' name. So these former homosexuals had evidently repented and accepted God's grace to straighten their lives out.

John 3:16
Revelation 3:20

[Chode]

and the filthy disease ridden queers win again...

[weegee]

Animal rights activists win out over the religious.

A photographer who didn’t want to capture photos of animal sacrifice would call PETA to denounce the immoral proceedings.