Their mistake was saying why. In contract oriented work like wedding photography if you don’t want to take that gig (for whatever reason) you say you can’t, you don’t say you won’t and you ESPECIALLY don’t say why you won’t. Once you say why you’ve established that you are discriminating, then the only question is do the courts consider them a protected class.
This isn’t someone refusing to hire...it’s someone refusing to take a job. I can’t see any circumstance where the government could force someone to contract to work for someone else.
That’s been tried before. What comes next is (drum roll, please)...the quota system. Wedding photogs, florists, bakers, and, yes, even ministers, will be required to prove that at least 15% of their business comes from the gay community. Otherwise, it will be prima facie evidence of discrimination.
It’s true. I work with music, and when I’m solicited for a wedding, I ask: “do you want a wedding band, or a band at your wedding? That gets rid of 75% of the people I don’t want right there. Then I tell them: “no requests, it’s a band, not a jukebox.” That gets rid of another 15%. Then I tell them “no d.j. or recorded music”. And, “band gets the same food as the guests, goes in by the front door. $7,500 for one set, $10,000. for two.
Anyone who is left standing after that gets my band. Of course, if I really liked the person I’d be flexible about the last condition. Meanwhile, I have ways to screen out the people I don’t want to do business with, for whatever reason - a gay wedding or they just rub me the wrong way.
Exactly- you don’t give them ammo to file a suit. You simply say, I am sorry I am not available that day for a wedding shoot. Just make sure you don’t shoot another wedding that day, in case they check up on you (which they will). Take half day off work- do something else, work on your house, spend time with kids, grand-kids, go fishing..anything to show that you truly were not available.
Only way to fight this animal.....