Photographer faces law suit

Started Aug 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
santamonica812
Contributing MemberPosts: 818Gear list
Like?
Re: I am a Christian Wedding photographer.... here is my view.
In reply to steelski, Sep 2, 2013

steelski wrote:

Let me say this.
Would you tell a Muslim that they have to do a Jewish wedding.

Of course. And a Jewish photographer would have to do a Muslim wedding. You can't discriminate on the basis of religion...it's a protected group (lawyer talk)

Or a homosexual that they had to photograph at a anti-homosexual event.????

Probably not. Without turning this thread into a First Year Constitutional Law class, anti-discrimination laws protect certain classes of people. Some apply to all states, through the US constitution (through the 13th and 14th amendments). And some states add extra groups of people--for instance, gays in California. What you are asking is, can a person discriminate (by refusing services) against homophobes. I think a person could, legally, refuse to provide services. But note that if a religious group wanted to hire me for an event and that group happened to be anti-gay (e.g., Southern Baptists), then I could not refuse service . . . at least, that's my take on the question--this is not the area of law in which I practice.

How about a vegetarian that there is only meat on the menu....

I don't understand this sentence. What are you asking us to decide? If you are asking, "Can we force a vegetarian to eat meat?", the answer is obviously "no." If you are asking, "Can an all-meat restaurant be forced to have vegetarian options, the answer is again "no." If you are asking something else, you'll have to rephrase it, so that it's easier to understand.

Almost half of people in the USA are against gay marriage.

So. In terms of following or not following the law, how does that matter at all? This is always a difficult concept to explain to non-lawyers. But many of the laws are specifically designed to protect the rights of minorities, BECAUSE the majorities are against them. 50 years ago, in many states, the *overwhelming majority* of people were against interracial marriage. Were against non-segregated schools. The courts said, essentially, "We don't give a rat's ass about what the majority thinks. We're interested in giving people all the constitutional and law-based protections they are entitled to."

The notion of a Homosexual marriage is repulsive to the majority of Christians.... including myself. calling me old fashioned, out of touch, bigot, whatever you want.

It is good that you can contemplate being identified as a bigot, fearful, superstitious, etc. It saves us the trouble of applying that label to you.

I believe this is a form of Fascism towards Christians.

I do not think you understand what the word "fascism" means. Although I do hear the term thrown about by conservatives quite often . . . and when president W. Bush was in office, I'd hear liberals throw around the terms as well. (Equally wildly, and equally inaccurately.)

Getting us to bow to something we find offensive in the eyes of God is not a great direction for humanity.

Again, you're making a great case for being allowed to discriminate against Blacks, Jews, women, etc. . . this is the argument that bigots have been making for decades..."Let me discriminate against anyone I want, as long as my God tells me doing so is okay."

I am unpersuaded by this argument, thank goodness the courts are unpersuaded by this, and I suspect that history (based on how we now look at people opposed to interracial marriages, etc) will not be kind to you or to your position.

Time will tell, of course . . .

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow