p.11 #1 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Geez, those wedding photographers are very narrow minded. For a religion that is suppose to teach about love and acceptance, there sure are a lot of people willing to throw out some hate and discrimination. That's why I don't understand certain organized religions. I imagine that these people do not have any friends or family members that are gay. They must assume that it is a choice of the devil as opposed to a genetic predisposition, or a choice based on love. Get over it, and shoot the photos. If I was in the shoes of the lesbian couple, I would be very angry as well ---- I don't think I would go so far as a lawsuit, but I certainly would not be happy.
p.11 #2 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Ben Horne wrote:
Geez, those wedding photographers are very narrow minded. For a religion that is suppose to teach about love and acceptance, there sure are a lot of people willing to throw out some hate and discrimination. That's why I don't understand certain organized religions. I imagine that these people do not have any friends or family members that are gay. They must assume that it is a choice of the devil as opposed to a genetic predisposition, or a choice based on love. Get over it, and shoot the photos. If I was in the shoes of the lesbian couple, I would be very angry as well ---- I don't think I would go so far as a lawsuit, but I certainly would not be happy....Show more →
Let's switch it around...
Geez, those liberal thinkers are very narrow minded. For a liberal theology that is supposed to teach about tolerance and acceptance, there sure are a lot of people willing to throw out some intolerance and nonacceptance. That's why I don't understand liberal theology. I imagine that these people do not have any friends or family members that are Christians. They must assume that their beliefs are outdated and just fairy tales. Get over it, and find another photographer. If I was in the shoes of the photographers, I would be very angry as well ---- I don't think they should have been sued, and I certainly would not be happy.
p.11 #4 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
RedWhiteandRed wrote:
No, none do and certainly not the USA.
The laws on the books make murder and robbery illegal in both the USA and North Korea. The difference between USA and North Korea is how those laws are enforced. Even a socalist state recognizes a person has their own belongings and a basic right to life, except when the government decides otherwise... but in these countries, people to people, or people to business interactions are governed under these same rules in North Korea and the USA.
Walking down the street and shooting someone randomly will get me arrested in any country on earth, provided I'm caught. Even in the military during wartime. The key part is being caught and the enforcement. Either way it's still illegal per the laws written down.
Another question-- if I refuse all homosexual ceremonies, how am I discriminating? It would be discrimination if I accepted only lesbian ceremonies but not gay ceremonies.
p.11 #5 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Who is the famous photographer that gets quoted in here quite a bit that said something like, "only shoot good-looking brides" when asked how to be a successful wedding photog?
p.11 #6 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
There are followers of God who constantly use religion, any religion, to spread love, compassion, understanding, and peace. They bring people together instead of splitting them apart. There are also followers of God who constantly use religion, any religion, to spread hate, intolerance, discrimination, domination, and war. They hide behind ignorance and do horrible deeds to total strangers who have not done anything to hurt anyone simply because they are slightly different in the way they look, how they practice religion, or how they are born, all in the name of God, resulting in endless human misery and killing for thousands of years.
All followers of God believe one day they will either join their loving God in heaven or another hateful master in hell based on how they live their lives. Choose how you live your life wisely
p.11 #7 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
icecreamboy wrote:
Thank you for proving the point I was trying to make. You have no problem with the lesbian couple doing something like this, but if the tables were to be turned, you cry foul.
I don't see where you questioned the maturity of the lesbians for what they did. Instead, you defended them on the basis of "breaking the law" and "discrimination". But when I present the situation in reverse, your response is a personal jab at me.
Uh, no, your point has not been proven. The lesbians approached the photographer legitimately wanting someone to photograph their ceremony. They could have had no prior insight that the photographer would decline them solely on the basis of their sexual orienation. There are laws in place in the US to prevent discrimination against individuals, whether based on their gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. Let's say you're black. If you were denied service based on your race, would you just sit there and take it, or do you think you would be justified in finding legal recourse? Well guess what, whether you agree with it or not, in New Mexico denying service because of a person's sexual orientation is illegal discrimination.
And more importantly, in your scenario, you would specifically seek out a homosexual photographer in the hopes they would decline the job, specifically so you could sue them. And that is immature. Period.
I see no hypocrisy, either. If a homosexual photographer declined to shoot the event based purely on the sexual orientation of the client, then yes, he would be breaking the law and shouldn't be surprised to find himself facing a fine. However, depending on the type of anti-gay rally, he may have a legitimate case for denying to cover based on concerns for his safety.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if the photographer accepted. Gays tend to be much more tolerant of other people.
p.11 #9 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
adamp88 wrote: Uh, no, your point has not been proven. The lesbians approached the photographer legitimately wanting someone to photograph their ceremony. They could have had no prior insight that the photographer would decline them solely on the basis of their sexual orienation.
They could very well have had prior insight, especially since one is currently an EEO Compliance Representative with the Office of Equal Opportunity where she investigates claims of discrimination and sexual harassment. Me thinks me smells a rat.
There are laws in place in the US to prevent discrimination against individuals, whether based on their gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. Let's say you're black. If you were denied service based on your race, would you just sit there and take it, or do you think you would be justified in finding legal recourse? Well guess what, whether you agree with it or not, in New Mexico denying service because of a person's sexual orientation is illegal discrimination.
There is a double standard here. New Mexico does not recognize gay marriage, and does not treat civil commitment ceremonies as being on-par with marriage, yet it punishes photographers who likewise do not treat gay civil-commitment ceremonies the same as marriage.
And more importantly, in your scenario, you would specifically seek out a homosexual photographer in the hopes they would decline the job, specifically so you could sue them. And that is immature. Period.
No, I did not say that I would specifically seek out a gay photographer and hope they would decline in order to sue. I was just turning the scenario around. Funny how that when they do it, they are justified, but if I was in the same scenario, I would just be immature.
I see no hypocrisy, either. If a homosexual photographer declined to shoot the event based purely on the sexual orientation of the client, then yes, he would be breaking the law and shouldn't be surprised to find himself facing a fine. However, depending on the type of anti-gay rally, he may have a legitimate case for denying to cover based on concerns for his safety.
Could not conservative Christians be concerned for their safety as well?
However, I wouldn't be surprised if the photographer accepted. Gays tend to be much more tolerant of other people.
p.11 #10 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
I would NOT cover a gay or lesbian wedding because the situation would create an atmosphere that I personally would not feel comfortable with and I would not be able to preform to a professional level of quality and hospitality expected of me. When I shoot a wedding I interact with the guests I feel at ease and I am happy to be there.
I would not enter into a contract with them because I feel that I would not be able to fulfill my end of the contract, I would be uncomfortable, feel out of place, and it would be awkward for me. This feeling would affect my ability to deliver a product to the level I advertise it has absolutly nothing to do with them...its me. I would say the same thing to a couple that wanted to hold there wedding reception in a strip club or have a nudist colony exchange of rights.
Does that have to automatically make me a discriminatory person? So really Sue me
Its not an issue of hate or discrimination its just a simple amount of freedom of choice to be where you want to be when you want to be there. You cant expect your sexual orientation to force everybody in the world to approve or show up with big smiles about it.
What I don't understand about this couple is why they couldn't go down the road and find a photographer willing to cover the event for them, The heated discussion within this thread shows that there is enough photographers that would gladly cover the event instead they have to pull the discrimination card and get the ACLU involved and sue the photographer that denied service...might as well hire photographers by gun point now.
Discrimination laws are put into place to prevent system wide discrimination having a few wanting to abstain from making money and taking part in the events does not account to discrimination or hate...The whole town transit system was involved in Rosa Parks, we cant even compare it to the same level.
p.11 #11 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
The law is pretty clear. You can refuse a client for no reason-- however, once you declare a reason, you are subject to the law.
It is illegal to descriminate against race, creed, sex and sexual orientation.
If the Christian photographer could have just kept his answer to "no thanks. I don't wanna, and I don't have to tell you why" there wouldn't be a problem.
I suspect, that the Christian photographer made his religious beliefs known and made it very clear that he didn't approve of what they were doing. That crosses the line.
Some people just can't keep their opinions to themselves and get themselves in trouble.
p.11 #14 · 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.11 #16 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
icecreamboy wrote:
There is a double standard here. New Mexico does not recognize gay marriage, and does not treat civil commitment ceremonies as being on-par with marriage, yet it punishes photographers who likewise do not treat gay civil-commitment ceremonies the same as marriage.
This I do agree with, and hopefully it is rectified in the future (I think you could guess what kind of solution I'd be for ). However it is mostly irrelevant. I doubt Elaine Photography has a stipulation that says "we only shoot weddings" as that would eliminate a good portion of business, I would imagine.
No, I did not say that I would specifically seek out a gay photographer and hope they would decline in order to sue. I was just turning the scenario around. Funny how that when they do it, they are justified, but if I was in the same scenario, I would just be immature.
But in turning it around, you create a scenario where you/they are seeking to put someone in a difficult position simply to see if they refuse, for their/your monetary gain. I don't think this couple came into the situation with that mindset. I do think that the career choice of one of the couple would make her much more aware and willing to challenge any wrongdoing. Clearly we disagree here.
Could not conservative Christians be concerned for their safety as well?
Irrationally so, yes. Legimately so, as a homosexual present at an anti-homosexuality rally may be? I think you would agree the situations aren't on the same level. Though to be fair, the sexuality of the photographer in relation to the sexuality of his clients, in both of these cases, should never enter the picture in a professional capacity.
So tolerant that they would sue...
Yeah, they should've just taken the blatant discrimination and smiled. Who cares if someone is discriminating against you for reasons beyond your control? Heck, I suppose African Americans should've just taken their spots at the back of the bus like they were supposed to. How dare they try and act like they deserve equality.
Honestly, I have to agree wholeheartedly with DragonFlyDM here. I completely understand that some people feel uncomfortable around gays, and believe that it is wrong. However, that is your belief, and your belief is not law. The law quite clearly states that to openly discriminate on the basis of someone's sexual orientation is illegal.
If you are really that uncomfortable with the idea, why not simply say "I'm sorry, but I already have obligations that weekend and won't be able to shoot your ceremony. Good luck in your search."
p.11 #17 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
Oh, so you should lie rather than tell the truth. Is that the lesson you want to teach us?
"Discrimination" is currently the most over-used, politically correct word in the English language. If someone says or does something someone else does not like suddenly its actionable discrimination. I say again, this New Mexico law is inane, unnecessary and just plain stupid.
p.11 #19 · Christian Photographers Fined $6,000 For Refusing to Shoot Lesbian Commitment Ceremony
If you are fool enough to use discriminatory business practices, then you should be smart enough to keep your mouth shut.
Discrimination is pretty cut and dry-- sex, creed, color, sexual orientation. Very clearly printed in the law.
John Power wrote:
Oh, so you should lie rather than tell the truth. Is that the lesson you want to teach us?
"Discrimination" is currently the most over-used, politically correct word in the English language. If someone says or does something someone else does not like suddenly its actionable discrimination. I say again, this New Mexico law is inane, unnecessary and just plain stupid.
). However it is mostly irrelevant. I doubt Elaine Photography has a stipulation that says "we only shoot weddings" as that would eliminate a good portion of business, I would imagine. 