Photographer Loses Bid to Refuse Same-Sex Wedding Jobs

[Anguille]

Like many issues involving constitutional law, the law against discrimination in public accommodations is in a constant state of change. Some argue that anti-discrimination laws in matters of public accommodations create a conflict between the ideal of equality and individual rights. Does the guaranteed right to public access mean the business owner's private right to exclude is violated? For the most part, courts have decided that the constitutional interest in providing equal access to public accommodations outweighs the individual liberties involved.

I must say, that even though I believe discrimination is wrong (and trust that most Americans do as well) I come down on the side that this is a violation of individual freedoms.

Immie

I doubt anyone would disagree that this is a violation of individual freedoms. But just like your quote says, many believe that equality trumps freedom. I don't.

Equality is freedom.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

im a straight ally and im appalled at this.

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

 

[actsnoblemartin]

personally, if i were gay, id want a supportive photographer taking my photos at my wedding or commitment ceremony.

 

[Samson]

personally, if i were gay, id want a supportive photographer taking my photos at my wedding or commitment ceremony.

WTF is a "supportive photographer?"

 

[actsnoblemartin]

someone who is not against same sex marriage.

They wouldnt want a vocally against same sex marriage would they?

personally, if i were gay, id want a supportive photographer taking my photos at my wedding or commitment ceremony.

WTF is a "supportive photographer?"

 

[Samson]

So, someone that had a chicken as a spouce would be OK, as long as they were someone who is not against same sex marriage?

someone who is not against same sex marriage.

They wouldnt want a vocally against same sex marriage would they?

personally, if i were gay, id want a supportive photographer taking my photos at my wedding or commitment ceremony.

WTF is a "supportive photographer?"

 

[Immanuel]

No one is forcing the photographer to do business.

So, if I am understanding your drift here what you are saying is that the photographer can either capitulate to your will or stop doing business? Did we just flush individual freedoms down the shitter altogether?

Immie

My will?

The law has nothing to do with my will.

Is the sky falling again, Immie?

That is right your will. You seem to believe that you have the right to force everyone else to live the life you think they should live.

Immie

 

[NYcarbineer]

Were this photographer being forced to become gay at this wedding, then he might have a valid reason to refuse his services. He's there to take photos, like any other wedding, nothing more. It's not his place to insist that every wedding couple he photographs have the same sexual orientation as himself.

People like him need to worry about how they are abiding by their own morals and let others abide by their own.

Clearly the government is intervening here an not allowing her to abide by her own morals on this one.

Thanks to faux freedom supporters such as yourself.

Whether you like it or not, you don't get to decide which of your moral values are legally acceptable.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So it was New Mexico state law that they wanted to violate?

Hmmm...you want state's rights, you got them right there.

Fail.

The principle of state's rights does not grant the states the power to deny constitutional rights. You may not agree that the constitution protects an individual's right to association but that's what is being discussed. Debate that or play your states rights red herring and fail. Your choice.

Since they lost the case, the 'fail' would be you.

 

[manifold]

So it was New Mexico state law that they wanted to violate?

Hmmm...you want state's rights, you got them right there.

Fail.

The principle of state's rights does not grant the states the power to deny constitutional rights. You may not agree that the constitution protects an individual's right to association but that's what is being discussed. Debate that or play your states rights red herring and fail. Your choice.

Since they lost the case, the 'fail' would be you.

I already acknowledged that case law and precendent are not on my side. I'm still allowed to have an opinion.

But at least you seem smart enough to let that whole bogus states rights claim go. While that does speak to your ability to learn from your mistakes, it doesn't remove your intial, massive fail.

true story

 

[manifold]

Were this photographer being forced to become gay at this wedding, then he might have a valid reason to refuse his services. He's there to take photos, like any other wedding, nothing more. It's not his place to insist that every wedding couple he photographs have the same sexual orientation as himself.

People like him need to worry about how they are abiding by their own morals and let others abide by their own.

Clearly the government is intervening here an not allowing her to abide by her own morals on this one.

Thanks to faux freedom supporters such as yourself.

Whether you like it or not, you don't get to decide which of your moral values are legally acceptable.

I never said I did.

Reading comprehension fail!