Photographer Loses Bid to Refuse Same-Sex Wedding Jobs

the easiest way to avoid liberal prosecution then it seems is just not to hire ANYBODY of hispanic origin.. then only occasionally a Russian might slip through the cracks,, .. solved.

I see you're uninformed enough to believe that we only have illegal immigration problems with people of hispanic origin. How conservative (read that 'dumb') of you. You are aware that approximately 25% of illegal immigrants in the US are from non-hispanic countries, aren't you?

did you miss the part about an occasional Russian??? dingbat.

Occassional = 25% in your pea brain????
 
Is it ok to discriminate against people who don't pay their bills? How about bad neighborhoods or people who have contagious diseases? Should the local plumber be forced to service crack houses? Where does it end?

This photographer must be the greatest that ever lived. I am shocked that they could find no other in this economy. (Insert snark mark here)
 
That's just a stupid statement. You want to make it harder for the employer to identify the illegals, and then shut them down if you find that they have hired illegals? I work for a company that employs a HUGE percentage of Hispanic and Somali employees. Are there illegals working for us? I'm sure there are, but when we are not allowed by law to ask for anything other than a SSN and they have what looks to be a legitimate social security card, how do you propose that we go about not hiring them?

The fact of the matter is, you can't have it both ways. Either give us the right/authority to MAKE SURE that we aren't hiring illegals, and then punish us for hiring them; or don't give us the right/authority to make sure we aren't hiring illegals, and then punish the illegals when they are found out to be illegal.

As an employer, as long as you meet the obligation of due diligence and record keeping, it's not your fault that the illegals are giving you bad documents.

But if you work for a company that is picking up cheap labor on the corner and then paying them under the table, in an effort to pay below-American wages, then you deserve to be fucked over.
 
I support gay rights. However, that law is very bad law. As an owner of 3 businesses what right does the government have to tell me who to work for?
If I own a car and do not want to sell it to a black person if i was selling it that is my right. I would be a fool fordoing so but that is my right. The same shouldbe the law for all property. I oppose discrimination but if I own something I should have that right.
But modern day right wing "family values conservatives" always want it both ways. They want government in the rights of others when and if they choose it. The pure defiintion of a hypocrite.
I pray for a world where all are treated equally.
 
it is the law in that state.
From the link:
"Under the state's Human Rights Act, it is discriminatory (and illegal) for "any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction in offering or refusing to offer its services" on the bases of race, religion, color, sex, sexual orientation and several other factors."

Isn't NM a red state?


Yes, you are correct... it is the law... but it's a bad law.

But you are way off base on a red state.


So despite your wish that it isn't so... libs are legislating their morality on others.

There are currently 45 Democrats and 25 Republicans in the House of Representatives.

There are currently 27 Democrats and 15 Republicans in the Senate.

You're right. That law sucks. While I disagree with discriminating against anyone, I also disagree with a government (state or federal) telling an individual what they must or must not do.

Fucking lefties. You don't solve discrimination by force, you solve it by education. Being such a smart bunch and such believers in edumacation, you'd think they'd know that.

Hey it's been ok for years for the government to order people to wear seat belts. In many states, helmets. Now they can tell restaurants, bars, how patrons must behave regarding smoking, regardless of owner's preference. They want to control sodium, fats sold in stores and in restaurants. They are telling schools no sugar treats for birthdays. CA has tried to tie thermostats to central control.

But we're 'free.' Right?

Mind you, I've never started my car without insisting on every passenger being strapped in, even when the law was front seats only. I wouldn't think of getting on a motorbike without a helmet, hell I wear one when bicycling. I watch my sodium and fats, not to mention calories. I work out and keep my weight below the suggested levels.

However I support the Darwin award wannabees their rights.
 
I'm curious. If this wedding was being held at a nudist ranch or a private home in a dangerous neighborhood, would the photographer have to work it? Or only if the couple is gay?
 
So DR's should not have to treat Gay people?

If anyone knows the inventor of the blood transfusion died when he was taken to a white hospital and was refused treatment.
He was black.

Bullshit.

Charles Drew discovered Plasma. He saved millions, possibly billions of lives. He had headed up the Red Cross until the whites came to him and asked him to keep the white blood separate from the black blood and he said "blood is blood" and quit. Rumor is that when he was dying, he was rushed to the nearest hospital which wouldn't take him because it was a white hospital, and on the way to the next hospital he died. His family says that's not exactly what happened, I don't remember the details.
 
And the left complains that we conservatives tell them what they can do and not do.... the libs will come out defending this decision... the decision of a judge telling a photographer what they can photograph and not photograph.


Liberal hypocisy on display in 5...... 4.... 3.....2......

Photographer Loses Bid to Refuse Same-Sex Wedding Jobs

insert black wedding in place of same sex wedding.

still think the photographer can do whatever he wants?

how about a jewish wedding?

a christian wedding?

a muslim wedding?

have a restaurant? only want white people?

think you have the right to do that?

that arguement circles the drain and is flushed away with the fact that we have a congressional black caucus that forbids white membership, the whole arguement is racist and hypocritical.

Are you saying that if a white congressperson wanted to join the congressional black caucus, they would be denied? Do you have proof of that ever happening?
 
And the left complains that we conservatives tell them what they can do and not do.... the libs will come out defending this decision... the decision of a judge telling a photographer what they can photograph and not photograph.


Liberal hypocisy on display in 5...... 4.... 3.....2......

Photographer Loses Bid to Refuse Same-Sex Wedding Jobs

insert black wedding in place of same sex wedding.

still think the photographer can do whatever he wants?

how about a jewish wedding?

a christian wedding?

a muslim wedding?

have a restaurant? only want white people?

think you have the right to do that?

Private Business should have the right to refuse service to ANYONE they want, for ANY reason. The response from the public would be, if they disagree to boycott that business. It is NONE of the States business at all. The ONLY exception is emergency services.
 
And the left complains that we conservatives tell them what they can do and not do.... the libs will come out defending this decision... the decision of a judge telling a photographer what they can photograph and not photograph.


Liberal hypocisy on display in 5...... 4.... 3.....2......

Photographer Loses Bid to Refuse Same-Sex Wedding Jobs

insert black wedding in place of same sex wedding.

still think the photographer can do whatever he wants?

how about a jewish wedding?

a christian wedding?

a muslim wedding?

have a restaurant? only want white people?

think you have the right to do that?


In general, those things are different than not shooting a wedding due to religious reasons. If, for religious reasons, I chose to not shoot a wedding, that isn't any business of the states.

And, I am a photographer, and I refuse work all the time based on my "morals".

And if you don't want to shoot a interracial marriage for religious reasons?
 
So DR's should not have to treat Gay people?

If anyone knows the inventor of the blood transfusion died when he was taken to a white hospital and was refused treatment.
He was black.

Bullshit.

Charles Drew discovered Plasma. He saved millions, possibly billions of lives. He had headed up the Red Cross until the whites came to him and asked him to keep the white blood separate from the black blood and he said "blood is blood" and quit. Rumor is that when he was dying, he was rushed to the nearest hospital which wouldn't take him because it was a white hospital, and on the way to the next hospital he died. His family says that's not exactly what happened, I don't remember the details.



http://web.co.wake.nc.us/lee/ncbios/ncbios_d-f/drew/19820712dwtp.pdf
 
This is such a nonissue.

All said photographer has to say is that he is not available to take pictures on said homosexual's wedding day because of a prior commitment and then express his apologies and tell them they'll have to find someone else.

Simple.
 

Forum List

Back
Top