Posted on 09/21/2017 5:24:04 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo
A federal judge has dismissed a Minnesota couple's lawsuit challenging a state law for the right to refuse to shoot wedding videos for same-sex couples.
Chief U.S. District Judge John Tunheim in Minneapolis dismissed Carl and Angel Larsen's case Wednesday.
The St. Cloud couple, who own a videography company, Telescope Media Group, sued over a provision of the Minnesota Human Rights Act that bars discrimination by businesses.
(Excerpt) Read more at kstp.com ...
The absence of the right to refuse to work for anyone is slavery.
We can start any old time.
Yes they can. Bigots are not a protected class.
Sorry we have a previous engagement that day.
Exactly. Would they force Normal Rockwell to a paint their ideas and not his own?
The price of the photos can’t be regulated by a judge.
Charge a lot including an AIDS surcharge.
They could if they commissioned him to do it. If Rockwell historically had not accepted commissions for his work then he could refuse with no consequences.
Really that's the solution to all this, and it should be made legal. Forget discrimination laws and what have you. If a business does not want to cater to a specific segment or segments of society then let them clearly state as such and then let the market sort it out. Telescope Media doesn't want gay clients for religious reasons. They want to clearly state that on their website. Why not legally allow them to do so? People put off by their position can and will go elsewhere. People who support their position will bring their business to them. And the market will decide. Allow anyone to do it for religious reasons or any other reason with the only requirement being that they clearly post their preferences in their store or on their website.
So a male Muslim cabbie shouldn’t have to pick up a short-skirted female passenger, or someone with a service dog if the cabbie doesn’t want to?
Accepting commissions still implies artist interest in the subject. And “artist interest” is not discriminatory. It is simply artistic license. I’m not interested in horse scenes, seascapes, social issues, or mountains. I’m more into cike cans and barber chairs right now.
Why not? Telescope Media doesn't want to do gay weddings for religious reasons. The cabbie doesn't want to deal with certain clients for religious reasons. Let both of them run their businesses their way. Just clearly advertise their position ahead of time. People who disagree with them will avoid them. People who agree with them will patronize them. No confusion. No embarrassment. And as I said, it doesn't even have to be for religious reasons. Any reason at all.
And accepting the commission means that you are willing to do what your client hires you to do. I can't accept a job and then say I'm not willing to work on Wednesday if the job requires I do so. If a company is hired to video a gay wedding then they can't suddenly refuse when they show up for the job. They should be allowed to turn down the business to begin with by clearly stating who they will not provide services to. Which is what this video company wants to do.
They don’t have to turn it down because it’s gay. They can turn it down because they’re not interested. Pure and simply not interested
Sure, people can lie about their reasons for not wanting to do business with someone. It's an easy way out. But this company has chosen to pursue a more ethical path and make clear whom they wish to do business with and whom they do not. And the government is punishing them for that. Rather than encouraging dishonesty and punishing honesty I would prefer the government did the opposite.
It’s not a lie to say you are artistically not interested if you are not interested in that aspect of art.
Since that is not their reason for turning down the business then yes, saying you're doing it for artistic reasons would be a lie. And since their reason for turning it down is it violates their religious beliefs then I can understand why they would not want to resort to falsehoods. And the government should not encourage them to do so.
Just do the job wearing a T-shirt the whole time that says “Sin is Sin”.
If I have religious reasons for not being artistically interested in that commission, then it is not a lie to say I am not artistically interested.
No different than saying I’m not interested in going to a party. It might be because I can’t stand the host, but being up front about that does not somehow make me interested.
I defy anyone to show us where it was the intent of the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment to provide equal rights for homosexual behavior. It’s passage through the Congress was quite extensive.
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.