September is coming!
Please donate today.
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 ...
Just do a real sh#tty job if they insist on your services.
Tyranny from the bench grows stronger by the day.
What an obamanation.
Then they would sue for damages for wrecking their memories.
I say, in a very public fashion, donate the proceeds to a charity that rescues gays and turns them straight.
“I maintain the right to refuse service to ANYONE”
Tell them you only do same-sex unions that are celebrated in mosques because you need to have the right inspiration to do a proper job.
Obviously an appeal to the SCOTUS is in order.
If that goes the wrong way, it will be time for open rebellion, since the First Amendment’s free exercise clause will have been voided, and for martyrdom rather offering incense to the Imperial standards.
Exactly right! That is the price the modern state demands of you. The least you can do is to question the legitimacy of that state...or you can just pay up.
I thought rights came for free. Now the state has set a price.
I say, in a very public fashion, donate the proceeds to a charity that rescues gays and turns them straight.
This is the best idea, let them KNOW that their money will be working against their interests.
Now that right there is a TREMENDOUS idea. Well done - I may do that when the San Antonio City Council tells me I’m required to represent homosexual couples who are trying to become “families” in the eyes of the law.
Don’t GET me started.
work for homos or go out of business
my response would be: F*CK YOU. MAKE ME!
last i checked, you cannot fine someone or penalize them for NOT performing a service.
if a person can be punished for not working... how is that different from slavery?
Close up shop and move to Texas.
if a person can be punished for not working... how is that different from slavery?
Oh I am Sure Justice Roberts would call it a tax to justify it...
Shame on the supreme court of New Mexico.
If you are required to use your artistic expression to communicate a story, and you have an opposite idea of the meaning of the story, it is a contradiction which is ordering someone to take on someone else’s point of view and express it artistically. In this case you do not own your own expression. If the photographer really used her artistic expression, her own feelings to express the story as she perceived it, the results might not be good.
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.