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

Skip to comments.

“The Price of Citizenship”? NM S.Ct. Rules Christian must photograph same-sex ceremony
ReligiousLiberty.TV ^ | 08/23/2013 | Michael Peabody

Posted on 08/23/2013 10:00:45 AM PDT by ReligiousLibertyTV

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: Da Coyote

Many businesses have “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason.”


21 posted on 08/23/2013 10:42:13 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MeshugeMikey

I’d tell them that only real photogs still use film to ‘capture the moment’, shoot the whole gig then accidentally expose the film in a unfortunate dark room accident..............


22 posted on 08/23/2013 10:45:22 AM PDT by Red Badger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

that would work!!


23 posted on 08/23/2013 10:46:19 AM PDT by MeshugeMikey (Block Captain..Tyranny Response Team / al-Kilab Division)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

if forced conduct requires actions that violate their beliefs - ie being at a faux gay wedding, having to go through that garbage - the court is stomping over those persons beliefs and forcing them to do things against their beliefs.

I think all businesses need to have large statements on windows and doors and contracts that they reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason.


24 posted on 08/23/2013 10:46:37 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

So the court has sentenced the Christians to be slaves to the homos?

That Supreme Court needs to be impeached based on this decision alone.


25 posted on 08/23/2013 11:02:47 AM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ReligiousLibertyTV

Freedom of association. It’s a social event. She could just take really bad pictures, but that would end up in a lawsuit.

She could explain that the quality of her work depends greatly on how it is inspired and, well, what do you expect...


26 posted on 08/23/2013 11:05:58 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReligiousLibertyTV

I really feel for Elaine. This has got to be devastating. I’d sell my equipment and do something else. About the only thing she can do is “with everything you do, do it as if you were doing it for the Lord”. In this case, it would mean doing a VERY bad job.


27 posted on 08/23/2013 11:11:03 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bshaw

That Supreme Court needs to be impeached...

...for starters...


28 posted on 08/23/2013 11:12:07 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ReligiousLibertyTV

1. Take the pictures.
2. Charge $6,666.00 for the work as a standard fee.
3. Establish a suitable rebate for heterosexual couples.


29 posted on 08/23/2013 11:13:20 AM PDT by Lion Den Dan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

if forced conduct requires actions that violate their beliefs - ie being at a faux gay wedding, having to go through that garbage - the court is stomping over those persons beliefs and forcing them to do things against their beliefs.


I agree. It is a sort of “freedom of association” thing. Imagine how she will feel when actually doing it. And forcing her to do it is actually a form of slavery.


30 posted on 08/23/2013 11:14:07 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ReligiousLibertyTV
Darn it, did I forget to take the lens cap off, again?
31 posted on 08/23/2013 11:20:49 AM PDT by JPG (Obama, Juan and Linda Do Egypt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReligiousLibertyTV; All

I wonder what law school New Mexico’s judges got indoctrinated at?

Simply put, not only have the states amended the Constitution to expressly protect freedom of religious expression as evidenced by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution which New Mexico judges are wrongly ignoring, but the states have never amended the Constitution to protect so-called gay rights.

So New Mexico’s is actually in violation of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment which prohibits the states from making laws, like this pro-gay law, which abridge constitutionally enumerated freedoms like religious expression.


32 posted on 08/23/2013 11:27:19 AM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReligiousLibertyTV
Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr wrote this in 1905 ...

"A Constitution is not intended to embody a particular economic theory, whether of paternalism and the organic relation of the citizen to the state or of laissez faire. It is made for people of fundamentally different views, and the accident of our finding certain opinions natural and familiar, or novel, and even shocking, ought not to conclude our judgement upon the question whether statutes embodying them conflict with the Constitution of the United States." [198 U.S. 75-6 (1905).

In short, the photographer had every right to not take on the job.

33 posted on 08/23/2013 11:28:59 AM PDT by OldNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

Christians are officially a lower caste than others


34 posted on 08/23/2013 11:29:59 AM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ReligiousLibertyTV

I’d close my business then open it again later. The court is saying that this photographer is the only one in that town? The gay couple was just looking for incitement.


35 posted on 08/23/2013 11:47:05 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: Bshaw

New Mexico State Supreme Court. Next stop will be the US Supreme Court.


36 posted on 08/23/2013 12:30:00 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 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