Posted on 08/29/2013 7:27:47 AM PDT by rhema
In 2006, Vanessa Willock asked Elaine Huguenin, who co-owns Elane Photography in Albuquerque with her husband, Jonathan, to photograph a “commitment ceremony” that Willock and Misty Pascottini wanted to hold in Taos. Rather than saying that she was unavailable on that date, Ms. Huguenin declined because of her Christian beliefs. She believed that their Christian faith was in conflict with the message communicated by such a “ceremony.” Willock and Pascottini found another photographer, but nevertheless filed a complaint with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission accusing Elane Photography of discrimination. The Commission held a one-day hearing, issued an order finding that Elaine had engaged in “sexual orientation” discrimination, and ordered the Huguenins pay $6,637.94 in attorneys’ fees to the two lesbians. The Huguenins appealed this decision all the way to the New Mexico Supreme Court, which issued its ruling last Thursday against the Huguenins. In its ruling, New Mexico Supreme Court Justice Edward Chavez held that a photographer who declines to use her artistic expression to communicate the story of a same-sex ceremony is obligated to do so. (I wonder whether the outcome would have been the same had it been a Moslem photographer? Just asking.) New Mexico does not allow homosexual marriage and Justice Chavez’ opinion acknowledged that providing services for the ceremony violated the Christian’s sincerely-held, traditional beliefs.
In a concurrence accompanying the opinion, Justice Richard C. Bosson wrote that the photographer and her husband, Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, “now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives,” adding “it is the price of citizenship.” (Emphasis added.) Justice Richard C. Bosson wrote:
(Excerpt) Read more at touchstonemag.com ...
Exactly. If I ever get married then I can't see placing the memories of my big day in the hands of someone I had to sue to do the photography.
Exactly. If I ever get married then I can't see placing the memories of my big day in the hands of someone I had to sue to do the photography.
““I maintain the right to refuse service to ANYONE””
I’m not trying to be argumentative, but is an entity really allowed to do that?
Christian persecution isn’t just a middle-east thing anymore. Obama and the federal government have declared open season on all people who don’t embrace the secular-communist-homosexual-muslim agenda.
Oh, I can't wait for THAT worm to turn. How much fun will it be to someday take away the left's chew toys in the name of 'citizenship'?
taxes are penalties, which is a punishment. no lash, but you still experience loss
Does this work in California too? Someone should go ask Steven Spielberg to film their gay bondage porn and when he refuses sue him. This could be fun.
Just do a real sh#tty job if they insist on your services.
Exactly. If I ever get married then I can’t see placing the memories of my big day in the hands of someone I had to sue to do the photography.
Exactly, it is like bad mouthing your optometrist before your eye surgery and then waking up blind, DUH
“I maintain the right to refuse service to ANYONE”
Most people out there fail to understand that the civil rights movement in the 1960’s was started to prevent GOVERNMENT DISCRIMINATION and GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED/ENFORCED DISCRIMINATION, and not a person’s own right to Privately discriminate, it was later mission creeped out later to start telling private associations how they MUST behave...
Time for the slaves to stage an insurrection.
“In a concurrence accompanying the opinion, Justice Richard C. Bosson wrote that the photographer and her husband, Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, ‘now are compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives,’ adding ‘it is the price of citizenship.’”
It’s as if this judge read the First Amendment upside-down and backwards. I’m speechless.
Exactly, this is slavery, and should be fought as such at the Supreme Court.
placemark
Another black-robed twit needs to be put against the wall.
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.