Leftist and homosexual tyrants in black robes rule over us by decree.
Posted on 02/28/2014 9:02:45 AM PST by Kazan
Americans draw a fine line when it comes to respecting each other’s rights. If a Christian wedding photographer who has deeply held religious beliefs opposing same-sex marriage is asked to work a same-sex wedding ceremony, 85% of American Adults believe he has the right to say no. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only eight percent (8%) disagree even as the courts are hearing such challenges.
The survey of 1,000 Adults was conducted on July 7-8, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
What happened in Arizona was a combination of the media distorting the intent to the legislation, inept politicians that couldn't articulately defend the legislation (and or craft it) and gutless politicians that caved into political correctness.
Leftist and homosexual tyrants in black robes rule over us by decree.
no shirts no shoes no service
You don’t need religion. I have the right of association as we all do. Will I be forced to have a gay experience next?? Because that’s basically that’s what they’re feeding our kids.
and many of those 85% voted for Willard, a guy who thinks that “Christian Photographer Have No Right to Turn Down Same-Sex Wedding Job” (2014)
Pretty soon, the child molesters will be suing because you won’t hire them as a babysitter!
How about a baker asked to make a cake with two dudes on it? Was that in the poll?
Communicate you have a non-refundable deposit of 50%.
Communicate you will legally be required to shoot pictures, but you do not personally believe or support same-sex weddings. You’ll try, but sometimes you get quite upset and lose your concentration.
Communicate that the last gay “wedding” you did had lots of great close-ups of the ceiling and floor and you get so emotional that you tend to forget the centering of the wedding party picuturs and that whole “focusing the picture thingy.”
Communicate those are your terms and disclosures, but you’ll give it your best try.
Communicate you guarantee you will have at least 5 good pictures or they do not have to complete payment.
Put it in writing as best efforts under these terms and disclosures.
Or get out of the wedding picture biz.
OR, only work by multiple referral and do not advertise or accept any business that does not come to you by direct referral from multiple existing clients.
Or get out of the wedding picture biz.
A SMART Christian Photog would take the job instead of risking a lawsuit, then “arrange” to hurl chunks when the groom and groom kiss each other.
It would certainly leave an impression, that’s for sure.
Forcing someone to do a job against their will or face extreme punishment is slavery, whether it is picking cotton in a field, baking a cake, or taking pictures at someone's wedding.
People should have the right to choose what they will or will not do. Nobody should have to power to walk into a stranger's business and demand that the person do a task for them or else lose their business and/or be personally bankrupted.
Nobody should be forced to live with the fear of wondering if today is the day that a total stranger will take my business away from me.
-PJ
Look, I looked at the legislation. It could be used to do ANY denial of service based on religion.
You could have Christians refusing to serve Muslims or vice versa or Muslims refusing to serve pork etc.
Furthermore, I agree a person contracted for a gay wedding should have right of refusal before serving.
But, at the same time, no more public place like a restaurant should have the right to refuse service for that reason unless there is something additional, like lewd behavior, being loud, etc. Otherwise, we have no legitimate reason to say they can’t deny service to Jews, blacks etc.
I support the intent of the law. But, the law went much further.
I was thinking about this because I toyed with the idea of becoming either a wedding photographer or a DJ. Baking a cake is bad enough, but you bake the cake and you’re done with it. You don’t have to attend the ceremony. With being a photographer, you have to attend the whole kit and caboodle and take pictures of the whole disgusting event, and we know how queers act when they’re in “party” mode. Same thing with being a DJ. You have to be there when all the kissing (yuk!) and other perversions are being acted out.
"My expertise is in shooting heterosexual weddings... which entails things like making the bride look beautiful, making the groom look handsome, making the couple look great together. A homosexual wedding has entirely different needs and special requirements. My expertise does not qualify me to properly portray the things a gay wedding photo shoot should portray, therefore it's best for all involved if you find a photographer who specializes in such events".
Mechanics are allowed to specialize in certain types of cars if they so choose, a programmer can specialize in certain programming languages, a chef can specialize in certain types of food, so a photographer should be able to specialize in certain types of weddings.
Must he prove his beliefs are “deeply held,” though? Anyone should be able to refuse service to anyone, for any reason. Specifying “deeply held religious beliefs” is problematic, IMO.
If a gay friend invites me to his gay wedding will I be forced to attend and have a gay time?
What if my gift isn’t tasteful enough?
While I agree with that, the issue is the anti-discrimination laws in all states would not allow you to do that.
Thus, the problem in states where sexual orientation is listed in that law.
The other states, you can still reject working for a gay wedding. The laws are an attempt to prevent that from being an issue in those states.
But, they are ultimately too broad so far and could lead to a lot more than just giving people the right to reject baking a cake for a wedding etc. Unfortunately, they are so broadly written from the KS one to AZ, that it could even come to hurt Christians at some point since basically any religious objection can result in denying service.
If I can give senior citizen discounts why not a heterosexual discount? My standard price for a wedding is 100,000 but I give 95% discount when doing wedding for joining of opposite sex.
The same right to refuse would also apply to jews, blacks and muslims
federal courts have no law making powers
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.