Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Photographers guilty of ‘discrimination’ for refusing to shoot same-sex ‘wedding’: New Mexico court
Life Site News ^ | June 7, 2012 | MATTHEW CULLINAN HOFFMAN

Posted on 06/07/2012 3:39:42 PM PDT by NYer

June 7, 2012 (LifeSitenews.com) - A New Mexico appeals court has upheld a lower court verdict that a photography studio that refused to shoot a same-sex “wedding” on religious grounds is guilty of “sexual orientation discrimination” under state law.

According to the court’s verdict, the trouble began for Elane Photography when the company was contacted by lesbian Vanessa Willock asking if they could photograph a “commitment ceremony” for a Willock and her “partner.” The company, owned by Christian couple Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, responded stating that they only shoot traditional weddings, and do not do “same-sex weddings,” but thanked Willock for her interest.

The following day, Willock’s anonymous “partner” sent an email to Elane Photography stating that she was going to “marry,” without stating that the “marriage” would be between herself and a woman.  She asked if the company could travel to the location of the event, and was told that it could. 

The two emails would be used as proof that the Huguenins were discriminating against Willock in her suit against the company, and resulted in a judgment of $6,637.94 against the defendant.

Although the government of New Mexico does not recognize same-sex “marriage,” civil unions, or domestic partnerships for homosexuals, the court ruled that Elane Photography had engaged in illegal discrimination based on sexual preference under the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA).

The court brushed aside the claim that photography is a form of “speech” protected under state and federal law, ruling, “The NMHRA does not force Elane Photography to endorse any message or modify its own speech in any way. Rather, the NMHRA requires Elane Photography merely to offer its photography services without discrimination against any member of a protected class.”

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

It also dismissed the argument that compelling the owners of the company to photograph such weddings would constitute a violation of freedom of religion, stating, “the burden on freedom of religion experienced by Elane Photography is unclear.”

The Alliance Defense Fund, which was representing the couple, has decided to appeal the case to a higher court.

“Americans in the marketplace should not be subjected to legal attacks for simply abiding by their beliefs,” said ADF Senior Counsel Jordan Lorence. “Should the government force a videographer who is an animal rights activist to create a video promoting hunting and taxidermy?

“Of course not, and neither should the government force this photographer to promote a message that violates her conscience. Because the U.S. Constitution prohibits the state from forcing unwilling artists to promote a message they disagree with, we will certainly appeal this decision to the New Mexico Supreme Court.”

Law professor and legal commentator Eugene Volokh denounced the decision as an attack on freedom of speech protections.

“It seems to me that the right to be free from compelled speech includes the right not to create First-Amendment-protected expression — photographs, paintings, songs, press releases, or what have you — that you disagree with, even if no-one would perceive you as endorsing that expression,” he wrote in his blog, the Volokh Conspiracy.

Volokh cites the U.S. Supreme Court case of Wooley v. Maynard (1978), in which a state license plate containing a motto that drivers disagreed with was seen as violating the first amendment, even though no reasonable person would be believe that the bearers of the plate were in agreement with the motto.

“It follows even more strongly, I think, that people should have a First Amendment right not to create expression that they don’t wish to create, regardless of whether outsiders would perceive such creation as an endorsement of the message,” said Volokh.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: glbt; homosexualagenda; marriage; photography; ssm

1 posted on 06/07/2012 3:40:06 PM PDT by NYer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; little jeremiah; narses
Although the government of New Mexico does not recognize same-sex “marriage,” civil unions, or domestic partnerships for homosexuals, the court ruled that Elane Photography had engaged in illegal discrimination based on sexual preference under the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA).

Most disconcerting!

2 posted on 06/07/2012 3:41:40 PM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Down is up. Wrong is right.

The bakery didn’t have to make a cake with the name Adolph Hitler on it and in fact reported the parents who named their child this to the authorities.

Either you can choose what artistic endeavor you want to participate in or you can’t.


3 posted on 06/07/2012 3:44:03 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Washington could not tell a lie, Nixon could not tell the truth, Obama can't tell the difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The court brushed aside the claim that photography is a form of “speech” protected under state and federal law, ruling, “The NMHRA does not force Elane Photography to endorse any message or modify its own speech in any way. Rather, the NMHRA requires Elane Photography merely to offer its photography services without discrimination against any member of a protected class.”

Horsesh1t.

If that is their reasoning its past time to change the way we do things. SCREW protected classes..that is not equality before the law.

The correct response if “Eff yourself”.


4 posted on 06/07/2012 3:45:21 PM PDT by Adder (Da bro has GOT to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Right, the state does not recognize such pairings, some judicial activism is going on to extend the protection to a class that does not exist.


5 posted on 06/07/2012 3:45:31 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Washington could not tell a lie, Nixon could not tell the truth, Obama can't tell the difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Western civilization will go down in flames.


6 posted on 06/07/2012 3:48:45 PM PDT by PetroniusMaximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Now not believing in pagan ways is considered discrimination?

Then everything is discrimination!

Personal freedom in this country is long gone.

7 posted on 06/07/2012 3:48:53 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Am I guilty of discrimination if I don’t kiss the bride?


8 posted on 06/07/2012 3:48:58 PM PDT by Darteaus94025
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The photographers could have had ‘equipment failure’ and left the scene.


9 posted on 06/07/2012 3:50:17 PM PDT by Joe Bfstplk (People should enjoy the fruits of their labor. No labor, no fruit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

This is a good article:

http://hancockbaptist.org/05ArticlesText.php?t=JesusWouldDiscriminate.txt


10 posted on 06/07/2012 3:52:05 PM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

What happened to those signs “we have the right to refuse service to anyone”? Besides, the “partner” was DISHONEST enough not to even mention it was a fag he was going to marry in the e-mail.

Lesson to photogs in the future: find out by subtle questioning what the name of the bride is...


11 posted on 06/07/2012 3:56:30 PM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer
MSM is just as guilty. They like to inform us that various Gay Pride Parades happen.....but you notice, they never show what happens within that parade. Because, they know the general public would be disgusted by what they'd see.
12 posted on 06/07/2012 4:00:31 PM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
"the NMHRA requires Elane Photography merely to offer its photography services without discrimination against any member of a protected class."

If a gay photographer refused to photograph a heterosexual wedding because he only wants to do "gay weddings", would they consider that to be discrimination? I'll bet not, because straight people are not likely a protected class. If that is the case, then the anti-discrimination law itself is discriminatory.

13 posted on 06/07/2012 4:01:29 PM PDT by NJRighty (AB0)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: max americana

“What happened to those signs “we have the right to refuse service to anyone”?

Dang, beat me to it. ;)

More government overreach. It is not the government’s job to tell us who we can and cannot like or service or sell our wares to.

The business owner takes the business loss/risk when they turn away customers but its THEIR business decision.


14 posted on 06/07/2012 4:03:23 PM PDT by Molon Labbie (Prep. Now. Live Healthy, take your Shooting Iron daily.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NYer

If this isn’t just plain tyranny I don’t know what is.

Doesn’t the Constitution forbid involuntary servitude?


15 posted on 06/07/2012 4:09:25 PM PDT by Argus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk

“Damn, the battery pack died and we don’t have a spare.”


16 posted on 06/07/2012 4:09:28 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

“Sorry, we’re all booked up.”

How many times do businesses get in trouble because they forget to say those few words?


17 posted on 06/07/2012 4:10:51 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

I think think this could be the tip of the iceberg. Let’s hope all Christian Churches can properly defend themselves when they refuse to perform a gay marriage. What a LOAD of SH*T. There is no such thing as “gay marriage”, but the gays are too lazy to come-up with their own name for their union.


18 posted on 06/07/2012 4:11:19 PM PDT by NoRedTape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk

Or they could go ahead and take the best photos for these bullies then take the payment received and donate it to Exodus International, P-FOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays) or some other group that helps homosexuals out of this perversion and let the bullies know that is exactly where their payment for services rendered is going.

They can’t do a darn thing about it and it allows the photographer to remain honest.


19 posted on 06/07/2012 4:17:19 PM PDT by Sister_T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk

Or they could go ahead and take the best photos for these bullies then take the payment received and donate it to Exodus International, P-FOX (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays) or some other group that helps homosexuals out of this perversion and let the bullies know that is exactly where their payment for services rendered is going.

They (the bullies) can’t do a darn thing about it and it allows the photographer to remain honest.


20 posted on 06/07/2012 4:17:54 PM PDT by Sister_T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NYer

When I see pics on tv of two men or two women being “married” it makes me a little sick.

There is no way I could have taken pictures either.


21 posted on 06/07/2012 4:18:30 PM PDT by JudyinCanada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

That is even better.


22 posted on 06/07/2012 4:20:29 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYer

This is where a lot of the money and productivity of this country is going now...into all of these law suits and appeals and bickering for people who want to have their own way. It is not as if they can’t get some other photographer, nor is it a real problem. It is simply a big waste of time and money when you think about it. Why do they choose to spend the limited days of their lives in this way? Their issue is not getting a photographer, but forcing a particular photoghrapher to do something uncomfortable for them. Typical leftys. My Lefty sister intentionally serves up particular foods she knows people don’t like and then acts “hurt” when the person does not eat the thing she knows they have ALWAYS not eaten. There is some perverse joy they get in making others squirm. Rude, crude.


23 posted on 06/07/2012 4:22:01 PM PDT by Anima Mundi (ENVY IS JUST PASSIVE, LAZY GREED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Great case to reestablish the Freedom of Association for private businesses.


24 posted on 06/07/2012 4:28:53 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Now that is a good link.....thanks for the post...

http://hancockbaptist.org/05ArticlesText.php?t=JesusWouldDiscriminate.txt

Discrimination is the right response....

25 posted on 06/07/2012 4:52:05 PM PDT by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NYer
shoot the job making sure you won't get sued but shoot it so they are not happy with it...

or tell them up front you don't feel comfortable shooting it and if they want to take their chances that it will not be "Perfect" because of it you'll do it after they sign a waver stating such.

26 posted on 06/07/2012 4:53:12 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: max americana

What I don’t understand is, why would you want to hire a photographer who doesn’t have their heart in the work? Obviously, to provoke something and get a nest egg to start with...


27 posted on 06/07/2012 5:41:08 PM PDT by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

In the eyes of leftist some people are “more equal” than others.

You wont find a greater resist than a leftist politician and/or judge.


28 posted on 06/07/2012 6:14:43 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Chode

No, I would not want to see such a disgusting display of sodomy. I would not go, and thus I could not shoot it.

I will not participate in sodomy.


29 posted on 06/07/2012 6:20:00 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
i admire your principals, but... giving them all your money in a lawsuit simply makes them richer and you poorer.

i'd rather go and make them all uncomfortable by laughing at them out loud while shooting and give them an inferior product than my house and money by way of some scumbag in a black robe...

30 posted on 06/07/2012 6:48:17 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Chode
I do a little wedding photography. When people call and their first question is "what is the price" I am tempted to respond, "how attractive is the bride?" But then, I never, ever give a price over the phone and insist on meeting the bride and her mother first.

If a gay couple came in, I would probably state a charge something on the order of $100K to cover the service and $200K for the images. But I would never, ever enter into any contract to provide wedding photography services without meeting the couple first. If I can't feel good about the couple, no deal or an outrageous price.
31 posted on 06/07/2012 7:39:18 PM PDT by LukeSW (The truth shall make you free!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: NYer
5 Conclusion The notion of responding to a responsibility confronts us with a paradox. It clearly involves an element of choice and a complete absence of choice. 68Southern Burlington County, NMCP v Township of Mount Laure/336 A 2d 713 (NJ 1975) (Mount Laurel I). 69Southern Burlington County NMCP v Township of Mount Laure/456 A 2d 390 (NJ 1983) (Mount Laurel m. 70Hil/s Development Co v Bernards Township 510 A 2d 621 (NJ 1986). 71See table of non-derogable rights ins 35 on states of emergency. l'mperty and equality: public accommodations and the constitution 85 Responding to a responsibility to which one is called upon to respond is not the act of a subject. But neither is it simply a matter of being 'subject to' a responsibility. To be responsible is a mode of existence that cannot be reduced to either the passive or the active voice.72 Judges have a difficult job. They must do justice to both parties before them. When each side claims legitimate interests and plausible arguments for legal , ......... ..,·v .. ,judges face a painful and sometimes unbearable situation. The easy to deal with dilemmas such as this is to ·convince oneself that some other vorncll.illlg body should deal with the problem. But this conclusion is always a I do not mean that the court should always take the opportunity to the law; I do mean that the court cannot refuse to become involved. When is excluded from a restaurant on the ground of race, the precedents may establish a right to exclude or a right of access, or they may be silent on the If they establish a right to exclude, the judge's refusal to change the law l"."'""'" a ruling of law as much as a choice to change the rule. If the law is the judge's refusal to create a right of access cannot be characterized as a to make law; rather, the judge has ruled that property owners have the to exclude on the basis of race in public accommodations, and has done so, '"r,..,,..,,,r, in the face of a constitutional right to be free from discrimination by persons. Either way the judge goes, she will be making law, determining meaning of property in the new post-apartheid South Africa is not all the same. A private home is not the same as a retail store. interests exist in the context of the home that do not exist in the context e store. Stores implicate interests in equal access to the public world of the - a world that is public, notbecause it is publicly owned, but because it '~~'"""'"nt" a sphere of life to which all have access without regard to race. It is strict application of property law (the right to exclude) could have the of re-inscribing apartheid in a country that just got rid of it that requires a teei)tucll.izA:tt"ionofthe meaning of property. It is not possible to merely extend granted to white people to black and colored persons. The rights previously by white owners must sometimes be changed to achieve equality. Thus, may not have been a public accommodations notion in the apartheid era white people were, in fact, admitted to public accommocl~tions even if had a right to exclude them. If some prejudice remains, and a residual to keep certain groups out of certain neighborhoods, the right to exclude be limited in the context of the type of property to which norms of access prevail over norms of exclusiveness. useful to distinguish among types of social settings new article: Just Shoot Me: Public Accommodation Anti-Discrimination Laws Take Aim at First Amendment Freedom of Speech VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW [Vol. 64:3:961 2011] JUST SHOOT ME 1001 3. Political Speech: It‘s Not Just for Politicians Third, courts must be careful to protect political speech from far-reaching public accommodation laws. Occasionally, the message that an entity refuses to endorse may be a political one, which strengthens its First Amendment claim. In Citizens United, the Court held that ―political speech must prevail against laws that would suppress it, whether by design or inadvertence.‖261 In Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia, the Court stated that ―there is practically universal agreement that a major purpose of that Amendment was to protect the free discussion of governmental affairs.‖262 Considering the continuing controversy surrounding the federal Defense of Marriage Act (―DOMA‖) passed in 1996,263 in addition to the often contentious battles surrounding the marriage amendments adopted by thirty states,264 it is a plausible argument that expression on such topics should be deemed political. Additionally, at least one influential scholar advocates a broad interpretation of political speech which would almost certainly encompass the expression in both Elane Photography and Ocean Grove.265 Cass Sunstein suggests that political speech should include all speech which ―is both intended and received as a contribution to public deliberation about some issue
32 posted on 06/07/2012 7:44:43 PM PDT by haole (John 10 30)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chode

Sorry, I just don’t have the stomach for baring witness to an enforcement of Sodomy. Perhaps I’m fortunate that I am not a photographer by trade, and that I no longer live in the State of New Mexico.

A state under theses lawless judges freedom has very little if any value.

Theses ladys are criminals who intentionally lied to this company in order to acquire services that the company does not offer. They should be held accountable for that. But somehow I doubt actual justice will be done in a State that allows such lawless judges.


33 posted on 06/07/2012 8:16:03 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LukeSW
i heard that... ya gotta cover yer backside somehow
34 posted on 06/07/2012 8:21:50 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
ain't that the truth...
35 posted on 06/07/2012 8:28:49 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: NYer; Sirius Lee; lilycicero; MaryLou1; glock rocks; JPG; Monkey Face; RIghtwardHo; ...
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.


36 posted on 06/07/2012 8:31:49 PM PDT by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PetroniusMaximus

“Western civilization will go down in flames.”

That is their goal, but they’re not going to like the Islam and such that are replacing it. I have more in common with a Muslim than I do with an American liberal.


37 posted on 06/08/2012 3:18:57 AM PDT by kearnyirish2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NJRighty

Lesbian TX Judge Refuses To Marry Straight Couples

http://newsone.com/1895925/equality-lesbian-texas-judge-refuses-to-marry-straight-couples/


38 posted on 06/08/2012 7:05:52 AM PDT by massmike (The choice is clear in November: Romney or Caligula!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: NYer

I would bet the photog shop was targeted by the homo-fags. Where is the homo’s tolerance of the beliefs of others?

I always thought “discrimination” was legal. I know I practice discrimination. I discriminate against rapists, cannibals, fascists...


39 posted on 06/08/2012 11:32:07 AM PDT by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Not over yet, more to come:

The Alliance Defense Fund, which was representing the couple, has decided to appeal the case to a higher court. ... Because the U.S. Constitution prohibits the state from forcing unwilling artists to promote a message they disagree with, we will certainly appeal this decision to the New Mexico Supreme Court.”

40 posted on 06/08/2012 12:28:33 PM PDT by CedarDave (Voted for Newt last Tuesday in New Mexico -- too bad he's thrown in with Mittens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt; Rogle; leapfrog0202; Santa Fe_Conservative; DesertDreamer; OneWingedShark; ...

NM list PING!

I may not PING for all New Mexico articles. To see New Mexico articles by topic click here: New Mexico Topics

To see NM articles by keyword, click here:New Mexico Keywords

To see the NM Message Page, click here: New Mexico Messages

(The NM list is available on my FR homepage for anyone to use. Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from the list.)

41 posted on 06/08/2012 12:30:19 PM PDT by CedarDave (Voted for Newt last Tuesday in New Mexico -- too bad he's thrown in with Mittens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

May I suggest to the business owner that he seriously consider ‘going Galt’?

At ‘the Gulch’ we believe in freedom of association... Or the freedom to NOT associate.


42 posted on 06/08/2012 1:55:49 PM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

But, but, the Rainbow RINO Fithcal Conthervatives are in favor of competition and free Enterprise.

ESAD - if you do, you will.


43 posted on 06/09/2012 9:27:44 AM PDT by OldEarlGray (The POTUS is FUBAR until the White Hut is sterilized with Tea)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Joe Bfstplk

Then they would’ve just been sued for breach of contract?

There’s no satisfying the Uber-postgenderist abominators of nature, and it’s clear they won’t stop until everybody else worships their sociopathological ERRORs.


44 posted on 06/09/2012 9:33:27 AM PDT by OldEarlGray (The POTUS is FUBAR until the White Hut is sterilized with Tea)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: NYer
 
"I KNOW BUT ONE CODE OF MORALITY FOR MEN WHETHER ACTING SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY"
--Thomas Jefferson
 
Got Natural Law?
 
 
Sex, Evolution and Behavior
By Martin Daly and Margo Wilson
 
 
Got Socio-Biological Fitness?
 
 "Gay" penguins don't - not even in the San Francisco zoo
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=San+Francisco+gay+penguins
 
FAIL.

45 posted on 06/09/2012 9:35:45 AM PDT by OldEarlGray (The POTUS is FUBAR until the White Hut is sterilized with Tea)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson