p.2 #2 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Wow, so many people here quick to condemn the photographer, call her names, etc. What happened to the freedom of religion? Is that not a constitutional right? If someone doesn't want to do a job for you for any reason, so what, find someone else. How were the couple harmed? They can call another photographer.
Besides, wasn't there just a thread on here about having your picture on your website and the worry that people won't hire you because of your age, weight, etc? Seems if the B&G can discriminate than the photographer can as well. It is one thing to discriminate in hiring/firing practices, but I see nothing wrong with it when making business deals. The market will deal with it.
p.2 #3 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
JonStafford wrote:
Replace "lesbian" with "African American", "Jewish", "Latino", etc. and would your opinions change?
Lesbian is not a race, it's more of a choice regarding lifestyle and sexuality. However, some people have claimed to have been born homosexual. ::shrug::
Moreover, this is about morals and religious values. The Christian photographers have morals where they see the ACT of homosexual practice as bad or disagreeable. There is no ACT of being African American or Latino.
There is something that these two women are doing that these photographers do not agree with. These days, we paint everything with a large brush of political correctness and assume everything is racism.
If there is a potential client that you find out sells drugs or eats too many chocolate snicker bars or uses foul language or tickles you in a way you don't like to be tickled... and if any of these actions are against your values, beliefs, and religion... then by all means, you should have the right to deny service.
There are restaurants that don't offer service if you don't have a shirt and shoes. There are plenty of crazies that can walk in barefoot, get denied service, and then sue for discrimination because not wearing shoes is part of their no name religion. This day and age, they might actually win.
Lastly, EVERYONE has beliefs. The lesbian couple BELIEVES what they are doing is right and the Christian photographers are wrong. The Christian photographers BELIEVE what the couple is doing is wrong and that they are right to deny service. It's all about beliefs. So now, the court has to literally sit there and JUDGE whose BELIEFS are more significant and correct.
p.2 #4 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Saad Syed wrote:
Lesbian is not a race, it's more of a choice regarding lifestyle and sexuality. However, some people have claimed to have been born homosexual. ::shrug::
Moreover, this is about morals and religious values. The Christian photographers have morals where they see the ACT of homosexual practice as bad or disagreeable. There is no ACT of being African American or Latino.
There is something that these two women are doing that these photographers do not agree with. These days, we paint everything with a large brush of political correctness and assume everything is racism.
If there is a potential client that you find out sells drugs or eats too many chocolate snicker bars or uses foul language or tickles you in a way you don't like to be tickled... and if any of these actions are against your values, beliefs, and religion... then by all means, you should have the right to deny service.
There are restaurants that don't offer service if you don't have a shirt and shoes. There are plenty of crazies that can walk in barefoot, get denied service, and then sue for discrimination because not wearing shoes is part of their no name religion. This day and age, they might actually win.
Lastly, EVERYONE has beliefs. The lesbian couple BELIEVES what they are doing is right and the Christian photographers are wrong. The Christian photographers BELIEVE what the couple is doing is wrong and that they are right to deny service. It's all about beliefs. So now, the court has to literally sit there and JUDGE whose BELIEFS are more significant and correct.
p.2 #5 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
RedWhiteandRed wrote:
Likely yes. Most people never complain. How many folk moved to the back of the bus before Rosa Parks said no.
These are the people that truly advance society. Like the people that bravely take the camera off of 'P' mode and do some cross processing.
Red ... in all due respect ... While both situations have merit, to place Rosa Parks' contribution and this complainant's problem on the same plane of relevance is quite a stretch. Some may even consider the comparison an insult to Parks.
p.2 #6 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
To add to what Saad said, would you compromise your values and beliefs for money? What do you think about people who do? You judge the photographer harshly because you believe that her beliefs are wrong. But who says your beliefs are right? Do you really want the government deciding what we should believe?
p.2 #8 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Sooooo this means that as wedding photographers we are bound by judges' opinions to shoot gay commitment ceremonies which aren't even weddings?
As this situation shows, we can't refuse one and give an honest answer as to why. We either have to commit to it or give a dishonest answer. Thats sickening. Judges in this country are running a muck and have been for awhile.
p.2 #9 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
tomKphoto wrote:
> Moreover, this is about morals and religious values
I disagree 100% - it's about the freedom to choose your customers and has nothing to do with morals or religious values.
I agree with you in terms of it being about freedom to choose your customers - which is the underlying main point. I meant subjectively, the specific case had religion/morals as the reason why they denied service.
p.2 #10 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
As a Christian and a minister, I find this apalling, but not shocking. Things like this happening against Christians (and NOT against other religions) are becoming more and more commonplace. Sadly, it's so often overlooked in the mainstream media.
Was it wrong to make Rosa Parks sit at the back of the bus? Absolutely. But why is it right for the government to make Christians sit back there now?
I find it very interesting that, according to some, Christians aren't supposed to have the right to say ANYTHING about a belief that they adhere to. But yet for their beliefs it's okay to call the Christians "narrowminded lemmings, uncaring, unhuman, unenlightened, bigoted, ignorant, intolerant, discriminant..." and the list goes on and on. Can you say, "Double-standard"?
The photographers in question here have every right to turn down this job.
Ronald Reagan said it best: "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem." It is very applicable here.
p.2 #11 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
We all discriminate, everyone of us…by the things we choose to wear, the foods we eat, our professions, the friends we choose to hang out with, to the religions we align ourselves with.
But my biggest objection is how every little-tennie-weenie-itsee-bitsee minority group these days says “discrimination” and there is a money hungry lawyer standing-by in the shadows.
So what the heck is next in the lawsuit lineup? Are department stores going to be sued next because they don’t carry a particular brand of clothing suited for a minority group?
Oh please, if a store can’t cater to a particular requirement, then we’d go shop somewhere else. Same with photographers; if one cannot meet the requirement for a client, then the client needs to go shop for another photographer. Such as with this case, the lesbian couple should have sought out another photographer. But in this litigious society we live in these days, it’s way to easy to simply file a lawsuit!
Bottom line here folks…For some, you just lost your right to turn down work…without lying!
So…how many of you professionals have non-discrimination clauses in your contracts??
p.2 #13 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
First, let me state that this is probably the most ridiculous thing I have read in weeks. If I want to deny service to anyone, I have the right to do so. You don't NEED photographs taken, you WANT photographs taken.
Secondly, I think I shall use my weight to take advantage of all the money hungry lawyers. I think I'll sue all the clothing stores that don't carry Big and Tall clothing lines, because that is discriminating to overweight people. I'm gonna be rich!
p.2 #14 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
icecreamboy wrote:
Was it wrong to make Rosa Parks sit at the back of the bus? Absolutely. But why is it right for the government to make Christians sit back there now?
No one makes Christians sit at the back of any bus. But keep that pagan idolatry out of the courts, the schools, the city halls. Sit where you like.
p.2 #15 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Some more details. It appears Elaine Photography didn't provide pricing or availability information just because the couple was gay. That violates the New Mexico Civil Rights Act. The business didn't know the laws of their own state. Making matters worse, the woman she gave the brush off to is currently an EEO Compliance Representative with the Office of Equal Opportunity where she investigates claims of discrimination and sexual harassment. Not to mention a member of the Diversity Committee at University of New Mexico. Oops.
One wonders why Ms. Willock thought Elaine Photography would be the right photographer for her job. I think there's more to this story and Ms. Willock might have gotten tipped off on Elaine Photography by someone else in the GLBT community. In the traditional meet & greet interview that all of us go through, it would become clear that this client and vendor were not the right match.
This is a win-win for everyone. Elaine Photography will no doubt get a huge jump in business from their desired clients and Ms. Willock scores in her community. All the legal fees are being paid by outside interests.
Edited by tomKphoto on Apr 11, 2008 at 08:40 PM GMT
p.2 #17 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Saad Syed wrote:
Lesbian is not a race, it's more of a choice regarding lifestyle and sexuality. However, some people have claimed to have been born homosexual. ::shrug::
Moreover, this is about morals and religious values. The Christian photographers have morals where they see the ACT of homosexual practice as bad or disagreeable. There is no ACT of being African American or Latino.
There is something that these two women are doing that these photographers do not agree with. These days, we paint everything with a large brush of political correctness and assume everything is racism.
If there is a potential client that you find out sells drugs or eats too many chocolate snicker bars or uses foul language or tickles you in a way you don't like to be tickled... and if any of these actions are against your values, beliefs, and religion... then by all means, you should have the right to deny service.
There are restaurants that don't offer service if you don't have a shirt and shoes. There are plenty of crazies that can walk in barefoot, get denied service, and then sue for discrimination because not wearing shoes is part of their no name religion. This day and age, they might actually win.
Lastly, EVERYONE has beliefs. The lesbian couple BELIEVES what they are doing is right and the Christian photographers are wrong. The Christian photographers BELIEVE what the couple is doing is wrong and that they are right to deny service. It's all about beliefs. So now, the court has to literally sit there and JUDGE whose BELIEFS are more significant and correct.
p.2 #18 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
M Tahir wrote:
The Christian photographers BELIEVE what the couple is doing is wrong and that they are right to deny service. It's all about beliefs. So now, the court has to literally sit there and JUDGE whose BELIEFS are more significant and correct.
++1
The part that is troublesome is that a business is discriminating on the basis of some identifiable trait. The photo part matters little.
p.2 #19 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Red, you seem to have quite the dislike for Christians, even saying they are more hypocritical than the rest of the world. Got any facts to back it up? Didn't think so. As for denial, why are you so sure your views are right? You can't prove you are right any more than Christians can prove they are right. But somehow that makes you right?
Now you are beginning to see why the government should not be telling us what to believe. Who knows, it might just be a Christian government and then where would you be?
p.2 #20 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
> Turning down a job is not discrimination - turning down a job because you are ____ and I do not agree with your ____ is.
Indeed, the issue here was the lack of providing pricing and availability information purely based on sexual orientation. It's illegal. They could've eventually refused the work, but aren't allow to close the door in the beginning.
