berry
Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
Malibu, CA 90263
(310)506-4667
From: Scarberry, Mark
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 9:16 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who
Discriminated Against Gays
In response to Marci:
Law Academics
Cc: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who
Discriminated Against Gays
And if the NYT refused to include same- sex couples in its wedding section, it
would be sued. Or mixed race couples. Or to sell to same-sex cou
gt;> Pepperdine University School of Law
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone
>>
>>
>>
>> ---- Original message ----
>> From: Brad Pardee
>> Date: 08/23/2013 12:44 AM (GMT-08:00)
>> To: 'Law &
TE Smartphone
>
>
>
> Original message
> From: Brad Pardee
> Date: 08/23/2013 12:44 AM (GMT-08:00)
> To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
> Subject: RE: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who
> Disc
Wedding photography is speech for money, and a lot of it. The photographer
who depicts the wedding in a non- joyous manner is not going to get paid, is
going to receive terrible reviews online, and even be boycotted. She or he
will find themselves with no wedding jobs. The photographer who
Wait a second: For whatever reason the NYT exists, whether an altruistic free
expression of news, or as a greed capitalist oppressive tool of The Man, it's
still illegal to refuse to sell papers to someone because they are
gay/straight/black/white/Catholic/Jewish/Iranian(whoa, are there any emb
igionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 2:28 AM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: Re: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who
> Discriminat
ties in to the subject
> at hand.
>
> Brad
>
> From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
> [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 2:28 AM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: R
sts.
Mark Scarberry
Pepperdine University School of Law
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone
Original message
From: Brad Pardee
Date: 08/23/2013 12:44 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: New Mexico Supreme Cou
subject at hand.
Brad
From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Jean Dudley
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 2:28 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer
Again, as a photographer, once you put your unique artistic style on the
market, it is a business. If you can't provide your unique artistic style to
everyone, and insist on withholding it based on religious belief, then you need
to offer your unique artistic style free to friends and family;
On Aug 22, 2013, at Thu, Aug 22, 9:06 PM, "Brad Pardee"
wrote:
> This is not correct. The issue is neither the customers' identity or the
> free market. It is about the merchant being required to participate in
> events that they cannot participate in by virtue of the tenets of thier faith
To follow up on Will's point, would the photographers violate the law, or the
contract the law requires them to make, if they did not attempt to portray the
wedding as a joyous celebration? I presume they would at least violate the
implied terms of the contract that is forced upon them. If so, t
jorem Dei Gloriam
Private Practice
Charlotte, North Carolina
From: Brad Pardee
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 12:06 AM
Subject: RE: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer
a.edu] On Behalf Of Steven Jamar
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 10:29 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Against Wedding Photographer Who
Discriminated Against Gays
I'll bet the ph
.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
sses 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
a.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 C
om: 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
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
20 matches
Mail list logo
