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

Skip to comments.

New Mexico photographer loses gay marriage case
AP/Deseret News ^ | 8/23/2013

Posted on 08/23/2013 6:48:09 AM PDT by markomalley

A commercial photography business owned by opponents of same-sex marriage violated New Mexico's anti-discrimination law by refusing to take pictures of a gay couple's commitment ceremony, the state's highest court ruled unanimously Thursday.

Elaine Huguenin, who owns Elane Photography with her husband and is the business's principal photographer, refused to photograph the ceremony because it violated her religious beliefs.

The court held that "a commercial photography business that offers its services to the public, thereby increasing its visibility to potential clients" is bound by the New Mexico Human Rights Act "and must serve same-sex couples on the same basis that it serves opposite-sex couples."

"Therefore, when Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony," the court concluded, the photographer "violated the NMHRA in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races."

The court rejected arguments that the anti-discrimination law violated the photographer's right to free speech and the free exercise of religious beliefs.

(Excerpt) Read more at deseretnews.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-119 next last
So if you are a Christian and are unwilling to compromise your beliefs, you may as well crawl in a hole and die.

Rev 13:16-17 And he shall make all, both little and great, rich and poor, freemen and bondmen, to have a character in their right hand, or on their foreheads. And that no man might buy or sell, but he that hath the character, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

1 posted on 08/23/2013 6:48:09 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The principle was established in the 60’s when courts ordered restaurant owners to serve blacks.


2 posted on 08/23/2013 6:49:39 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

But if it was a muslim photographer hired to photograph a pork BBQ party ......


3 posted on 08/23/2013 6:49:48 AM PDT by SkyDancer (A white woman would be accused of racism if she gave birth to a white baby.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

PS - so why didn’t that couple just go to another photographer? They were just instigating is all.


4 posted on 08/23/2013 6:50:51 AM PDT by SkyDancer (A white woman would be accused of racism if she gave birth to a white baby.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Simply put, gay religion wins out over Christian religion.

America 2013.


5 posted on 08/23/2013 6:52:25 AM PDT by ryan71 (The Partisans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer
They were just instigating is all

Yes.

Speaking solely for myself, I don't want to give my business to those who don't want it.

6 posted on 08/23/2013 6:52:28 AM PDT by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

I’d take the photos only by being paid UP FRONT, then when the pictures came out poorly, off color, out of focus, etc., Tough Sheit!


7 posted on 08/23/2013 6:53:17 AM PDT by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
So the New Mexico Human Rights Act trumps the US Constitution?
8 posted on 08/23/2013 6:53:57 AM PDT by Flycatcher (God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Simple solution...in future,when called upon to photograph such a perverse,pagan,ritual just do such a bad job that the perverts will wish they had gone elsewhere.And if the perverts complain,offer them a full refund.
9 posted on 08/23/2013 6:54:09 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (If Obama Had A City It Would Look Like Detroit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
This is FORCED accordance.

They are saying "screw your religious beliefs."

Obey or PAY!

10 posted on 08/23/2013 6:54:27 AM PDT by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ryan71

It’s not a Christian issue. It’s a moral issue. An atheist should be allowed to say No as well.


11 posted on 08/23/2013 6:54:33 AM PDT by AppyPappy (Obama: What did I not know and when did I not know it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This law also violates the 1st Amendment in regards to Freedom of Association which the SCOTUS has already ruled is precluded by the freedom NOT to associate. It’s “Settled Law”.


12 posted on 08/23/2013 6:54:43 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

are you folking kidding me

what about the signs that say we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone?

OK fine, charge them 10K for their stupid sinful pics


13 posted on 08/23/2013 6:55:35 AM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
In the US today, ever other religion wins out over Christianity. Every one.

Islam, gay, enviro, bestiality, pedophilia, all of them.

14 posted on 08/23/2013 6:55:41 AM PDT by ryan71 (The Partisans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA
The principle was established in the 60’s when courts ordered restaurant owners to serve blacks.

The vital difference being that it's not abnormal,or immoral,to be black whereas....

15 posted on 08/23/2013 6:55:42 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (If Obama Had A City It Would Look Like Detroit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“that’s nice, dear” would be my response to the fedgov... and continue not providing service to whomever i wish

if i’m forced to provide my services without question... how am i any better then a cog?

most business owners run a business because they want to run things their way and not at the whims of those far less qualified to perform the job


16 posted on 08/23/2013 6:56:13 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I wonder if this applies to lawyers also. If you have something you want to sue someone for, and you pick a lawyer out of the phone book and discuss your beef with him, is he allowed to say no, he won’t take your case?


17 posted on 08/23/2013 6:56:20 AM PDT by HomeAtLast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
If I was there I would ask how this ruling can possibly coexist with the State Constitution's Art II, Sec 11.
Art. II, Sec. 11. [Freedom of religion.]
Every man shall be free to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and no person shall ever be molested or denied any civil or political right or privilege on account of his religious opinion or mode of religious worship. No person shall be required to attend any place of worship or support any religious sect or denomination; nor shall any preference be given by law to any religious denomination or mode of worship.

18 posted on 08/23/2013 6:56:41 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Could they become a private photograhy company - members only?


19 posted on 08/23/2013 6:56:55 AM PDT by stars & stripes forever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
I would either shut my business and retire, go into another line of work, or move my photography business across the line to ARIZONA. I would not give into the gay mafia.
20 posted on 08/23/2013 6:57:03 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Not a comparable thing at all.


21 posted on 08/23/2013 6:57:06 AM PDT by HereInTheHeartland (Just wanted to say I hope you great NSA folks are enjoying my posts here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer
PS - so why didn’t that couple just go to another photographer? They were just instigating is all.

They were probably looking for a photographer who would refuse to do the shoot so they could bring charges against him to show what will happen to anyone who opposes the homosexual agenda.

22 posted on 08/23/2013 6:57:42 AM PDT by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

they’re also helping competing homo businesses by having the fedgov force the competitors out of business or cave into their demands... making it no longer worth it... which would result in the owner shutting down

this is all about helping homos


23 posted on 08/23/2013 6:58:03 AM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Flycatcher
So the New Mexico Human Rights Act trumps the US Constitution?

No, the court ignored the State's Constitution as well: see post 18.

24 posted on 08/23/2013 6:58:48 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sten
“that’s nice, dear” would be my response to the fedgov...

This was the state Supreme Court, not the feds.

25 posted on 08/23/2013 6:59:06 AM PDT by IYAS9YAS (Has anyone seen my tagline? It was here yesterday. I seem to have misplaced it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

im certain that the complainants have no idea how POOR the results of any photo shoot where the photographer doesnt necessarilty WANT to be working would be...


26 posted on 08/23/2013 6:59:09 AM PDT by MeshugeMikey (Block Captain..Tyranny Response Team / al-Kilab Division)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I was thinking that if this case goes to the USSC, then this ruling will be overturned. But then I remembered John Roberts.


27 posted on 08/23/2013 6:59:12 AM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley; AlexW
Worse ... they invented a condition, legalized it and subjected normal people to an abnormal rule making good and innocent people criminals.

All in what?

10 years?

Every person, entity and agency that fascillitated this abomination is well ensconced and procreating.

America is done, folks

28 posted on 08/23/2013 6:59:23 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I’d appeal all the way to the Supreme Court.


29 posted on 08/23/2013 6:59:47 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

Welcome to Acirema where everything is upside down. According to the a%%hats on the NM joke court, businesses cannot post “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” AND businesses MUST tolerate all kinds of misbehavior, since “offers its services to the public, thereby increasing its visibility to potential clients” is bound by the New Mexico Human Rights Act.

Three words - MOVE TO TEXAS.


30 posted on 08/23/2013 6:59:53 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

But that’s not hat happened and had the photographer been an atheist I bet we wouldn’t be talking about this, right now. This was not about upholding their gay rights. It was about removing Christian rights. When do you ever hear gays coming out against atheists? Most of them are atheists.


31 posted on 08/23/2013 7:00:40 AM PDT by ryan71 (The Partisans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
This law also violates the 1st Amendment in regards to Freedom of Association which the SCOTUS has already ruled is precluded by the freedom NOT to associate. It’s “Settled Law”>

I hope this can be appealed. Unfortunately, the Roberts court will likely uphold the "human rights" law.

32 posted on 08/23/2013 7:00:51 AM PDT by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey
They ignored the State's own Constitution, take a look at post 18.
33 posted on 08/23/2013 7:01:44 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wbill

This is economics 101. This is why we fled England.

If two people are going to do business with each other they should agree personally. Neither one should have the government breathing down their back forcing them to do it.

Now those forced by the government to render their service have no incentive to do a good job.

If I were the photographer I would make all the photos suck. =)


34 posted on 08/23/2013 7:02:03 AM PDT by the_boy_who_got_lost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Easy solution, take really crappy pictures and then sue when they refuse to pay.


35 posted on 08/23/2013 7:02:34 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the people. T Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Despite the fact that restaurants reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. And still do.

Everything now is coming down to our lives decided by some PC judiciary. More signs of 3rd world-— where you have to know/bribe the judge for justice.

This should be appealed. Noone HAS to serve, in the business they own, just anyone. This is like saying a private business is a public toilet facility— must serve, as public accomodation. It’s a photography business. They could have taken their business elsewhere- instead, let’s hassle with a lawsuit to make our point. But— they are still queers.


36 posted on 08/23/2013 7:03:00 AM PDT by John S Mosby (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

She needs to appeal to the US Supreme Court.

They are focused on their law, and she is focused on her Constitutional right to free exercise.

Free exercise does not end with Free Worship.

A person’s religion is being exercised every minute of every day.


37 posted on 08/23/2013 7:03:04 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland

Exactly the same thing. Only difference is you approve of the state ordering a business owner to do the first thing but not the second thing. The principle is the state gets to order the business owner.


38 posted on 08/23/2013 7:03:16 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

One step closer to them demanding that they have a RIGHT to have s3x with your child. Wow that sounds like the demands of those from a city that once existed—Sodom and Gomorrah.

Photographing such an event would make me throw up.


39 posted on 08/23/2013 7:04:28 AM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

I can not tell if someone is a homosexual unless they tell me. (I can guess but not know for sure)
Being black is obvious, there is a huge difference.


40 posted on 08/23/2013 7:04:52 AM PDT by svcw (Stand or die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

That is where the deck is stacked. What private citizen has the resources for such a fight? The queers have deep pockets from the likes of Soros, Hollywood, and other queer lovers.


41 posted on 08/23/2013 7:05:18 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
I think we all need a copy of the New Mexico Human Rights Act. And then we need to hang it on every school wall across the nation for all our youth to see.

Apparently, it is now the supreme law of the land. Our federal and state constitutions were so old-school anyway...

42 posted on 08/23/2013 7:05:59 AM PDT by Flycatcher (God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: svcw

If two men holding hands ask you to take a picture of their nuptials you know.


43 posted on 08/23/2013 7:06:11 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Track and photograph Justice Richard Bosson's every move.
Give him ZERO privacy.
Expose his dirty laundry, research all his personal records, and make them public.
Never let him have a free moment.
44 posted on 08/23/2013 7:07:05 AM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
The court held that "a commercial photography business that offers its services to the public, thereby increasing its visibility to potential clients" is bound by the New Mexico Human Rights Act "and must serve same-sex couples on the same basis that it serves opposite-sex couples."

I thought involuntary servitude is not allowed in the US.
45 posted on 08/23/2013 7:07:06 AM PDT by needmorePaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
This will wind up in federal court where it will most likely be overturned...U.S. constitution precedes any state court. People of New Mexico need to realize what electing democrats really entails!!!
46 posted on 08/23/2013 7:07:09 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer
But if it was a muslim photographer hired to photograph a pork BBQ party ......

To heck with that. Find a muslime caterer and ask them to make BBQ pork ribs and pork sausage. Bet the court won't touch that issue.

47 posted on 08/23/2013 7:07:27 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (The Second Amendment is NOT about the right to hunt. It IS a right to shoot tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

I hope they appeal but it’s an expensive process and there are not enough constitutional lawyers able to take.


48 posted on 08/23/2013 7:07:43 AM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: John S Mosby

Yes, the judiciary is now the super legislature. The upper, upper house.


49 posted on 08/23/2013 7:09:32 AM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: HereInTheHeartland

Most assuredly is.... if the state can tell you who you must serve or if people can smoke in your establishment it can find a way to tell you anything it pleases....and it will!!!!


50 posted on 08/23/2013 7:10:21 AM PDT by ontap (***)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-119 next last

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