Posted on 08/15/2020 9:54:52 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A federal judge in Kentucky has ruled that the city of Louisville cannot force a Christian photographer to work same-sex weddings because the “Constitution does not require a choice between gay rights and freedom of speech.”
U.S. District Judge Justin R. Walker on Friday ruled that Chelsey Nelson, a wedding photographer and blogger who is a Christian, can refuse to photograph and blog celebratory messages about same-sex weddings, according to the Christian legal firm Alliance Defending Freedom.
As per a local ordinance, as interpreted by Louisville officials, Nelson would face substantial penalties, including damages, court orders and compliance reports, if she declined to serve a gay couple.
However, the court held, “Just as gay and lesbian Americans ‘cannot be treated as social outcasts or as inferior in dignity and worth,’ neither can Americans ‘with a deep faith that requires them to do things passing legislative majorities might find unseemly or uncouth.’ ‘They are members of the community too.’”
The court wrote, “And under our Constitution, the government can’t force them to march for, or salute in favor of, or create an artistic expression that celebrates, a marriage that their conscience doesn’t condone. America is wide enough for those who applaud same-sex marriage and those who refuse to.”
It further stated, “The Constitution does not require a choice between gay rights and freedom of speech. It demands both.”
The court also denied the city’s request to throw out the lawsuit. In February, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest with the court supporting Nelson and her artistic freedom.
Nelson only photographs weddings between one man and one woman due to her Christian belief, which the ordinance wouldn’t allow, according to city officials.
Under the law, Chelsey cannot explain to clients and potential clients how her religious beliefs on marriage affect the artistic choices she makes. She can’t even include those beliefs on her website or social media sites.
“This interpretation of the law is a violation of Chelsey’s constitutionally protected free speech and freedom of religion,” ADF said in a statement. “And it should concern everyone who values the rights we have in America to live and work consistently with our beliefs free from government punishment.”
ADF Senior Counsel Jonathan Scruggs argued before the court, saying: “Just like every American, photographers and writers like Chelsey should be free to peacefully live and work according to their faith without fear of unjust punishment by the government. The court was right to halt enforcement of Louisville’s law against Chelsey while her case moves forward. She serves everyone. She simply cannot endorse or participate in ceremonies she objects to, and the city has no right to eliminate the editorial control she has over her own photographs and blogs.”
ADF said, “If the government can tell us what to think, what to do, and what to say, then we do not live in a free America.”
Judge Walker appointed by our Trump!
Louisville. Big city. Aren’t there any other wedding photographers available? Someone is looking for a fight. Who would want to marry him or her?
Hhhmmm...can the Oregon bakers use this?
As an intellectual exercise, let’s say a heterosexual couple wants a gay photographer to record their wedding. He says no. Why would they take him to court to force him to do the job? Why wouldn’t they say, Okay, we’ll find someone else? The same with cakes or anything else.
I don’t think it took even a few months between the legalization of gay marriage to “you must bake the cake for it, too.”
Well yeah. Just like a baker cannot be forced to bake a cake.
>>I don’t think it took even a few months between the legalization of gay marriage to “you must bake the cake for it, too.”
Actually that lawsuit came BEFORE same sex marriage was legalized.
The state of Colorado itself did not recognize same sex marriage so I don’t see how the state had standing to prosecute the photographer declining to photograph a sham ceremony.
Replace photograph with bake a cake. Tripped up by the topic of this article.
One of the greatest weapons the left has is lawfare. They use it proudly, loudly and often, whereas the right cowers from it.
Can a photographer be forced to photograph a nudist or Satanic wedding?
Or does an artist have the right to reject certain projects?
There are plenty of people who deny their skills, money isn’t the only thing that drives them.
Oliver Stone wouldn’t sign on to direct a film exposing Obama’s crimes at any price. And Joosey Smollett would refuse the work as well.
Used to be printers could reject certain texts or albums that they found offensive and would tell the creator to find someone else to put them out. But more recently I’ve heard of “bake the cake” lawsuits against printshops and t-shirt companies that didn’t want to print political tracts/shirts promoting the homosexual agenda.
“
A Democrat is the lowest form of evil scum.
This was in Kentucky, and it was the city trying to sue her, not at the state level.
Concur.
RINOs get to be second-lowest?
At least the Dems have stopped lying about what they are.
Yes this article’s case was in Kentucky but the first major case was the Colorado case against the bakery and Colorado did not recognize same sex marriage at that time, they couldn’t have had legal standing...
Unless you’re trying to cause problems why on earth would you hire a religious person to shoot your homosexual wedding..
The big lie behind the disgrace of same sex legal rights:
First, several states had people go through the time consuming and expensive procedure of gathering signatures and getting on the state ballot, and their propositions banning gay marriage won. Hillary, Obama and others say marriage is between one man and one woman. Many millions agree with that statement.
Gays promoted in the leftist media that “it’s a form of love, is it wrong to add love to this world” (applause). “Can’t we have rights like other people?” (more applause).
And Ellen is gay and so are pop music stars. We like them.
Then sudden ONE VOTE victory in the Supreme Court allows it. The next day the media celebrates and acts like “we” all are finally able to say we like the gay marriage thing. The Star Trek Sulu actor Takei gets married to his homosexual lover husband with a fawning People Magazine feature. Gay sex is “normalized” by propaganda. “Are you still a bigot against gays? Are you mature enough to accept gay rights?”
Then, “we” have our rights taken away! A Christian or Orthodox Jew following the Bible can now be forced to bake Satan worship or gay marriage wedding cake on demand or get tens of thousands of dollars in fines and jail time for trying to say no. And this photographer has to win a court battle to preserve her prior existing right to freedom. The targeting of Christians was pre-planned to get people to force several fines on the bakers (Todd Starnes did a fine job in The Deplorables Guide book describing the deliberate plan to destroy non-gay businesses.)
Summary: We had rights before, granted by God and preserved by our laws. These rights were taken away by homosexuals and their Dem sycophants.
WOW! I love to hear stories where a judge rules in favor of common sense and freedom!
He/She or It probably had to go through a bunch of people until they found someone who would turn them down.
The point is never the point, the point is the revolution.
And the goal of revolution is to force people to do things that they do not want to. If it is morally repugnant to them as well you get bonus points.
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.