Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court Rules itís Illegal for Christians to Refuse to Photograph Same-Sex Ceremonies [New Mexico]
Catholic Culture ^ | 6/5/12

Posted on 06/05/2012 7:21:34 AM PDT by marshmallow

The New Mexico Court of Appeals has ruled that it is illegal for a photography business owned by Christians to refuse to photograph a same-sex wedding ceremony—even though New Mexico law does not permit same-sex marriage.

The court based its judgment on the text of the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA), which makes it illegal “any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services . . . to any person because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation or physical or mental handicap.”

Elane Photography’s owners are Christians who believe that marriage is a sacred union of one man and one woman,” the court noted in its opinion. “Elane Photography denied Willock’s request to photograph the ceremony based upon its policy of refusing to photograph images that convey the message that marriage can be defined to include combinations of people other than the union of one man and one woman … They also believe that photography is an artistically expressive form of communication and photographing a same-sex commitment ceremony would disobey God and the teachings of the Bible by communicating a message contrary to their religious and personal beliefs.”

(Excerpt) Read more at catholicculture.org ...


TOPICS: Current Events; General Discusssion; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: homonaziagenda; homosexualagenda; nm; religiouspersecution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last

1 posted on 06/05/2012 7:21:39 AM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Next step is churches who refuse to do ‘gay marriage’ ceremonies lose their IRS tax exempt status.

That’s on the way soon.


2 posted on 06/05/2012 7:23:36 AM PDT by TigerClaws (He)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Any business should be allowed to refuse service to anyone for any reason. PERIOD.


3 posted on 06/05/2012 7:23:52 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Government is now telling private business what to do.

We’ve crossed the Rubicon, folks.


4 posted on 06/05/2012 7:23:52 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

CW-II is coming.

Sooner or later, someone has to tell the court to shove it up its liberal smelly Obama.

Sooner would be better than later.


5 posted on 06/05/2012 7:24:13 AM PDT by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: marshmallow

Mass civil disobedience is right around the corner. These judicial activists are crapping in their own nests.


7 posted on 06/05/2012 7:26:52 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Fine. It's not illegal to make BAD photographs. Even if you don't get paid for a client or two, word will get around the gay community and you will stop getting hired...
8 posted on 06/05/2012 7:28:00 AM PDT by 5thGenTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Does this mean if someone wanted to force a Christian photographer to shoot pornography, they could? Also, can the photographers do a bad job on the photos and say they will give all the money they receive for it to Focus on the Family or some other conservative organization the lesbonazis hate?


9 posted on 06/05/2012 7:28:11 AM PDT by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Do they have to do a good job? Sorry, left my thousands of dollars of cameras and lenses at the shop. How about a couple of Polaroids and a roll of 110 negatives?
10 posted on 06/05/2012 7:28:45 AM PDT by KarlInOhio (You only have three billion heartbeats in a lifetime.How many does the government claim as its own?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

It’s already started. The other side hasn’t fired on Ft Sumter yet.


11 posted on 06/05/2012 7:31:05 AM PDT by NoKoolAidforMe (I'm clinging to my God and my guns. You can keep the change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

They have to take photos, nothing said about them being good.


12 posted on 06/05/2012 7:31:21 AM PDT by razorback-bert (I'm in shape. Round is a shape isn't it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote; skeeter; rarestia

Somewhere, a certain “Tree Needs Refreshing”...


13 posted on 06/05/2012 7:31:33 AM PDT by carriage_hill (All libs & most dems think that life is just a sponge bath, with a happy ending.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: cripplecreek

It was considered more important to derail racial prejudice than to respect the right of freedom of association (or non-association). Now we’re where we are today, with people forced to associate or not, do business or not, based on whatever the government tells them they should do today.


15 posted on 06/05/2012 7:33:38 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Make sure you notice when I'm being subtly ironic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

Government has been doing it for decades. It began in the civil rights era when racist business owners were forced to serve blacks.

Personally I think those business owners should be able to make that decision for themselves. Smart business owners care only about the color of their customer’s money. (Capitalism is the worlds most non biased economic system)

Here in Michigan, bar owners were forced to ban smoking in their businesses. If I were a bar owner and wanted my business to be non smoking, I would have done so and promoted it to non smokers.


16 posted on 06/05/2012 7:33:46 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

What about blacks? Can you refuse services because you just don’t like them? You said anyone for any reason after all


17 posted on 06/05/2012 7:34:44 AM PDT by strider44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
"Does this mean if someone wanted to force a Christian photographer to shoot pornography, they could?"

They just did.

18 posted on 06/05/2012 7:34:51 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

“Here are your beautiful photos, now pay me $20,000 please. Thank you.”


19 posted on 06/05/2012 7:35:06 AM PDT by Mashood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

A photography business is a “public accomodation?”


20 posted on 06/05/2012 7:35:44 AM PDT by p. henry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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