I'll bet the photographer is still in business. As would those making cakes. If you choose to engage in civil disobedience, there is a cost. If you choose to follow your religious prejudices in some settings, there is a cost. Interracial marriages and interfaith marriages are indistinguishable on a principled basis. If you want and exception to the law, get it written into the law. If you don't want to abide by the law, get another job. Should the sears photographer be able to refuse customers on this basis? How about sears automotive? Or Walmart? No, brad, NM got it right. We do not, nor should we get unit vetoes on laws we don't like. Even if the dislike is for religious reasons.
Steve Sent from Steve's iPhone On Aug 22, 2013, at 10:36 PM, "Brad Pardee" <bp51...@windstream.net> wrote: > The problem with this rationale is that the religious liberty issue is about > being forced to be an active participant in a specific event. If the > photographer refused to take school pictures, Christmas card photos, etc., of > homosexual individuals, then there might be a question of discrimination. > But a wedding photographer is an active member of the wedding party and an > active participant in the wedding activities. The parallel to a wedding > between people of different races is flawed because discriminating against > people whose skin is a different color makes no more sense than > discriminating between people whose hair is a different color or whose eyes > are a different color. The difference between males and females, however is > quite substantive and not merely a matter of appearance. > > It's the same situation as in the recent story out of Oregon where the state > Attorney General is investigating a bakery that would not make a wedding cake > for a lesbian couple. Unless the bakery refused to sell cookies, pies, other > cakes, etc. to homosexuals, there might be a question of discrimination. > But, much like the wedding photographer, the bakery that provides the wedding > cake is an active participant in the wedding activities. > > We have now established that, if your faith does not allow you to be a > participant in a same-sex wedding, you are not permitted to be a wedding > photographer for anybody. You are not permitted to bake wedding cakes for > anybody. We had a lengthy discussion here some time back about a woman who > was, if I recall correctly, kicked out of a graduate psychology program > because of what her faith teaches on the subject of sexual orientation. And > this is what passes for "religious freedom" in today's climate. > > Brad Pardee > > From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu > [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Joel > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 2:28 PM > To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > Subject: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who > Discriminated Against Gays > > > New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who Discriminated > Against Gays > Jonathan Higbee | August 22, 2013 > > The New Mexico state Supreme Court has ruled against a photography business > that refused to photograph a gay couple's commitment ceremony because THE > BIBLE. > Advertisement > > From an ACLU press release: > > The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled today that Elane Photography illegally > discriminated against a same-sex couple by refusing to photograph their > commitment ceremony due to the business owner’s religious beliefs. > > The opinion stated: “We conclude that a commercial photography business that > offers its services to the public, thereby increasing its visibility to > potential clients, is subject to the antidiscrimination provisions of the > [New Mexico Human Rights Act] and must serve same-sex couples on the same > basis that it serves opposite-sex couples. Therefore, when Elane Photography > refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the NMHRA > in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people > of different races.” > > “When you open a business, you are opening your doors to all people in your > community, not just the select few who share your personal beliefs,” said > Louise Melling, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union. > “The Constitution guarantees religious freedom in this country, but we are > not entitled to use our beliefs as an excuse to discriminate against other > people.” > - See more at: > http://instinctmagazine.com/post/new-mexico-supreme-court-rules-against-wedding-photographer-who-discriminated-against-gays#sthash.NqCIsH37.dpuf > > > > > Joel L. Sogol > Attorney at Law > 811 21st Ave. > Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35401 > ph (205) 345-0966 > fx (205) 345-0971 > email: jlsa...@wwisp.com > website: www.joelsogol.com > > Ben Franklin observed that truth wins a fair fight - which is why we have > evidence rules in U.S. courts. > > > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; > people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) > forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
