Posted on 08/23/2013 8:40:17 PM PDT by marshmallow
In a 5-0 decision, the New Mexico Supreme Court upheld a lower court determination that it is illegal for a photography business owned by Christians to refuse to photograph a same-sex wedding ceremony--even though New Mexico law does not permit same-sex marriage.
The courts based their decisions on the text of the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA), which makes it illegal for “any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services . . . to any person because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation or physical or mental handicap.”
Referring to the business’s owners, Justice Richard Bosson said in his concurring opinion that the “Huguenins today can no more turn away customers on the basis of sexual orientation--photographing a same-sex marriage ceremony--than they could refuse to photograph African-Americans or Muslims.”
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicculture.org ...
I agree with you. The government's endorsement of a "marriage" no longer has any legitimacy or meaning. More and more of what used to be our government is losing legitimacy every day.
I would go and take nice pictures (while wearing my Rick Santorum t-shirt)...
Then queers should not be offended if they and this liberal judge can go pound mud.
Rulings like this and cases like this are what make me sit back and wonder what would my ancestors think that struggled to hold on to this dirt.
Sacrificing blood, sweat, tears and years to have some queers that could not even toe the same line as them destroy the fabric they believe in.
Crying fricking shame.
Here is the winner. Post the prices on a menu board, up front. Gay wedding? That is going to set you back six figures. To pay for future lawsuits.
Sure. I’d take the pictures. They would be of the floor, of the sky, etc.
Who th hell wants a photographer there who doesn’t want to be there.
What will happen is the shop will send interns. “Oops..overbooked. You get Benny the mentally challenged wedding photographer. Yes...he has been to one wedding—but I am sure he will be fine.”
If fags really want wedding photos, why would you contract somebody who is against your “big day” and then get a judge to FORCE them to do it? Aren’t there any pro-fag photographers in your circle of friends?
That’s like pissing off somebody who handles your food. There’s going to be a lot of digital spit in those photos.
They cannot sue you for your opinion abut gay marriage
Not yet, but I’m sure that’s coming too...
Christians to refuse to photograph a same-sex wedding ceremony—even though New Mexico law does not permit same-sex marriage.
So the Queers really had no “standing” to even pursue this case!
Of course.
So something else is going on here.
No, that would bring them. They are doing this purposefully.
How does a court compel someone to labor in commerce through a private contract? The court is treating this defendant like a criminal but no conviction was made. It is just a determination of "illegal" discrimination.
Is the court permitted to dictate the details of such a contract too?
“So how do they plan to force Christians to photograph same-sex ceremonies?”
It’s not about getting Christians to photograph ‘gay marriages’ or gay civil unions or whatever. It’s about being able to punish those who care enough about their faith to refuse with the power of the state, and to be able to keep punishing them when they keep refusing.
Freegards
Isn’t political affiliation public information. Is there not such a thing as a Republican Party membership card? Why would it be difficult to disprove a fake log-cabin Republican?
I do note that the gay Republicans would still be customers, and this would be evidence that we weren’t discriminating against protected grounds.
I’d fight this to the Supreme Court on slavery grounds. No man has the right to compel me to do a job. Unless maybe I am in the military, I could get the brig. But other than that?
I know what you mean but there really isn't any other type of Christian besides "traditional". If they aren't traditional they aren't Christian.
Except for politicians there isn't any affiliation except for your vote where I live. There is no "card" with legal status.
tie = time
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.