[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.

[weegee]

Welcome to FR.

There ARE cases of discrimination. There are restrictions on the BASIS of that discrimination. There are some who are trying to add sexual fetishes to the list of race, creed, color, and handicap. Political affiliation is NOT protected. Neither is State of origin.