Rasmussen:
Americans draw a fine line when it comes to respecting each other’s rights. If a Christian wedding photographer who has deeply held religious beliefs opposing same-sex marriage is asked to work a same-sex wedding ceremony, 85% of American Adults believe he has the right to say no. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only eight percent (8%) disagree even as the courts are hearing such challenges.
Are we supposed to assume that the photographer works for a company that has hired him or her to take wedding photographs, and is now asserting a right to pick and chose which jobs will be performed?
The First Amendment has been repeatedly held to protect the right to speak as well as the right not to speak.
The right not to speak includes the right not to create artistic expression that one doesn’t want to create.
The First Amendment even protects speech that is said for money so it also protects the right not to create certain artistic works for money.
But gays are practicing ”lawfare” against any such businesses.
A cake maker who refuses to make a gay wedding cake.
A photographer who won’t go to a gay wedding to take snaps.
And so on.
The courts are having a hard time with this.
For example see: Elane Photography v. Willock (N.M. Ct. App. May 31, 2012)
The public seems overwhelmingly sure of themselves, however.
Seems freedoms of conscience will be thrown aside over the ”right of gays to marry.”
@Nan G:
Seems freedoms of conscience will be thrown aside over the ”right of gays to marry.”
no, freedom of association and consience is being sacrificed not over the right to marry, they are being forced to participate and associate with people they decline to associate with. it is orwellian rebranding of a “right” not only are they declaring they have a right to marry but they have a right to force you to participate in what you may find vile and offensive. its not enough that they are left alone to do what ever they wish to do in a free society, no they are hijacking your freedom and demanding your support, labor, and quashing your rights in the furtherance of thier made up rights which are not enumerated in our constitution.
one way for the photographer to get around it is to say I will do the “wedding” just like I will do any other wedding but I will be wearing a shirt that says “I do not support gay marriage. and I am enslaved by the new system and forced against my will to participate” if they are ok with the photag wearing a neon colored t-shirt with big black lettering stating thier personal beliefs then maybe that is a solution
they can hang the shirt in thier business and any gay couples who come in can be told sure I will do your wedding, that is my attire for the event.
personally I dont care one way or the other I just hate the idea of someone being able to force someone else to participate and associate with people they wish not to associate with.
Wether self-employed or working for a company, there are certain things that people will refuse to do for reasons moral or otherwise.
I have never worked in a hospital where staff were forced to perform or assist with abortions if they had a moral or religious objection.
Although that might have changed…
To the best of my knowledge, Muslim cab drivers have not been penalized for refusing handicapped passengers with companion dogs.
This is a money-making stunt. Any rational person without an axe to grind would not want to do business with someone who doesn’t want their business.
As an example, there are a couple of restaurants where the staff has made it clear that I am unwelcome due to the color of my skin. I have not sued them, I just go to my favorite little Chinese hole-in-the-wall and eat. I’m always welcome there.
I would rather not interact with bigots, anyway.
I think the photographer and baker etc. have the right to choose who they do business with. There must be other bakers photographers etc. that will gladly do the gay weddings. Why not just go to them? Maybe the publicity and the lawsuit are all they are really looking for?