cannot turn away gay weddings in New Mexico

VayCayMom

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/05/NM-court-upholds-gay-discrimination-ruling

due to protected status as the article states... will the couple really be happy with the pictures IF they do hire this lady? I doubt they will hire her now. Bummer she has to pay their legal fees too.

Sam

This is total BS. I don't care which side of the issue you fall on forcing a small, (sole proprietor, in many cases) to provide a unique creative intimate service that goes against ones beliefs is total nonsense.

Try having a Muslim cook prepare pork chops for dinner and see how that works for ya.

This is about forcing an agenda not about obtaining services.

Sam

mercphoto

Sam, should I be able to turn away mixed race weddings if that goes against my "beliefs?"

Demian

People have bigoted beliefs against all kinds of things. Buuuut, you can't refuse service just because you don't like your client's race/religion/ethnicity. I'd say just suck it up and do it - it's not like by taking this work they're striking a huge blow for same-sex marriage.

Richard

This report deals with the appeal of an old case, which we discussed at excruciating length four years ago. The appeals court upheld the lower court's ruling that the photographers were guilty of violating state anti-discrimination law.

:deadhorse

Blurmore

This whole case is full of so much stupid I can't take it. How stupid (or ego-maniacal) do you have to be to tell someone you "only shoot traditional marriages" wtf? I dodge all manners of clients I don't like, and or I sense are crazy, with 2 words. "I'm booked". Sometimes I'm booked with a frosty drink at the pool, but "I'm booked" is all I tell them. smh.

bham

You don't even have to say "I'm booked", she just could have said I don't think I would do a good job for you because of my beliefs. Now if you still want to hire me I can't tell you that you can't but also I don't think you will get my best work, because of my beliefs. Then you are not refusing to service them, but being honest in that the quality of work will probably be affected. You can just say that I don't think we are a good fit, but because she flat out refused, she got sued.

mercphoto

I'm trying to wrap my head around how a professional cannot give their full, best effort in a situation like this. Really? Childish.

Sam

mercphoto wrote: »

Sam, should I be able to turn away mixed race weddings if that goes against my "beliefs?"

yes.

Sam

Demian wrote: »

People have bigoted beliefs against all kinds of things. Buuuut, you can't refuse service just because you don't like your client's race/religion/ethnicity. I'd say just suck it up and do it - it's not like by taking this work they're striking a huge blow for same-sex marriage.

Is everyone who disagrees with your position on an issue bigoted? Perhaps it's you who are bigoted by demising all who have a different opinion.

Sam

Sam

Blurmore wrote: »

This whole case is full of so much stupid I can't take it. How stupid (or ego-maniacal) do you have to be to tell someone you "only shoot traditional marriages" wtf? I dodge all manners of clients I don't like, and or I sense are crazy, with 2 words. "I'm booked". Sometimes I'm booked with a frosty drink at the pool, but "I'm booked" is all I tell them. smh.

Some are fearful dodgers, others try to protect other peoples feelings and some just tell it like it is.

Sam

Sam

bham wrote: »

You don't even have to say "I'm booked", she just could have said I don't think I would do a good job for you because of my beliefs. Now if you still want to hire me I can't tell you that you can't but also I don't think you will get my best work, because of my beliefs. Then you are not refusing to service them, but being honest in that the quality of work will probably be affected. You can just say that I don't think we are a good fit, but because she flat out refused, she got sued.

The real issue here is government intrusion. The government telling you or me what and how we can operate our businesses.

While it's apparent most here agree with this government intrusion forcing people to do what other may believe is wrong. However beware this is a double edged sword. The next mandate may very well be forcing you to do something you don't want to do or believe is wrong.

Sam

Sam

mercphoto wrote: »

I'm trying to wrap my head around how a professional cannot give their full, best effort in a situation like this. Really? Childish.

Bill you are absolutely entitled to your opinion. One can still voice their opinion openly, (well sorta, somewhat) of course it's much easier if that opinion is politically correct.

Sam

Sam

To add some clarification......it doesn't matter if I agree with the photographer or not. It's her business, her beliefs and her life.

Now I still want to know if you think a Muslim cook should be forced to prepare pork chops for dinner?

I view both situations as the same. Say yes to both or no to both. Trying to say yes for one and no for the other is simply trying to have your personal views enforced.

Sam

bham

mercphoto wrote: »

I'm trying to wrap my head around how a professional cannot give their full, best effort in a situation like this. Really? Childish.

I imagine the same way a wedding photographer may not give their full best effort in shooting something with nudity that would bother them. Not exactly the same, but if you don't agree with something, it will affect your work, consciously or subconsciously.

I wouldn't equate being childish, to be unispired and conflicted when shooting something.

Demian

Sam wrote: »

Is everyone who disagrees with your position on an issue bigoted?

Bigoted is when people have a problem with others living their life in a way that deals NO harm to others. Everyone has a right to live their life as they see fit, and if you have a problem with somebody being themself, then yeah, that's bigotry.

Wiki

bigot (plural bigots)
One who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.
One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

As far as the practicality, these laws exist for a reason. If businesses were allowed to discriminate, it would make life very unpleasant for hated and small minorities. You remember when the US allowed racial segregation? Even with the "equal" clause, black people (a rather large minority) were given the short end of the stick in nearly everything. For smaller and more despised minorities (same-sex couples, muslims, etc) legalizing discrimination would punish them even harder.

My thought, which pretty much runs with Merc's: If someone is absolutely incapable of dealing with all kinds of people, they probably shouldn't start a business serving the public.

mercphoto

Sam wrote: »

Is everyone who disagrees with your position on an issue bigoted? Perhaps it's you who are bigoted by demising all who have a different opinion.

Sam

Ah yes, the infamous "you gotta be tolerant of my intolerance otherwise you yourself are intolerant" defense. Sorry Sam, I have zero tolerance for bigots.

sphynge

Moderator warning
Hey guys

Moderator here - making sure we stay on wedding photography / business topic. I don't like interfering so let's make sure we stay on track

bham

Blurmore wrote: »

This whole case is full of so much stupid I can't take it. How stupid (or ego-maniacal) do you have to be to tell someone you "only shoot traditional marriages" wtf? I dodge all manners of clients I don't like, and or I sense are crazy, with 2 words. "I'm booked". Sometimes I'm booked with a frosty drink at the pool, but "I'm booked" is all I tell them. smh.

Well if you read the article this part my put a hole in your idea, be careful.

"Vanessa Willock asked the studio, Elane Photography, in 2006 about taking pictures of a same-gender ceremony but was told it handled only traditional weddings. When her partner contacted the studio without revealing her sexual orientation, she was given a price list and sent a follow-up email."

bham

I was actually contacted by someone a few years ago to shoot a same sex marriage, I told them sure I would be glad to meet with them to discuss it (it wouldn't have bothered me to shoot it) , but I never heard back from them. Not sure why. Now it makes me wonder if they were looking to identify people to setup for a lawsuit. I say this because the person who contacted me wasn't a person getting married but a friend, and that seemed a little suspicious.

Sam

sphynge wrote: »

Hey guys

Moderator here - making sure we stay on wedding photography / business topic. I don't like interfering so let's make sure we stay on track

I think we are being civil.......and I also think it's an important issue for small businesses beyond the politically correct agenda.

Sam

sphynge

Just a reminder to stick to that: the wedding photo/biz side of things.

Sam wrote: »

I think we are being civil.......and I also think it's an important issue for small businesses beyond the politically correct agenda.

Sam

Sam

mercphoto wrote: »

Ah yes, the infamous "you gotta be tolerant of my intolerance otherwise you yourself are intolerant" defense. Sorry Sam, I have zero tolerance for bigots.

First Bill has been around here for a long time and I do respect his opinion and believe he is a good person.

The problem I have is the concept that your (or the politically correct) position is the only one with any validity and anyone who disagrees is a (insert nasty name here).

You are asking me to accept your intolerance of people who disagree with your position.

I do agree everyone is welcome to the lunch counter, getting a pizza, shopping etc. But there are businesses and services that are not a requirement for life, and I generally fall on the side of freedom. Freedom for all. All being treated equally. Having government decide which group of people can be discriminated against versus which can not be discriminated against is allowing the government to determine at their whim which group has more rights and to mandate how you will run your business.

As long as the government is enforcing your belief system all is well, but what happens when they enforce someone else's belief system you don't agree with?

Photography is not pizza. It can as in wedding photography be very personal. Wedding photographers discuss at great length their clients and their selection of who they might accept as clients and who they will refuse as clients. I don't see this as anything different. This photographer was set up. The couple knew the photographer only did traditional weddings, yet the couple perused this photographer simply to make a political point.

Sam

Sam

sphynge wrote: »

Just a reminder to stick to that: the wedding photo/biz side of things.

It does relate.............the issue of photographing or not photographing a gay wedding isn't the real issue. That's a side politically motivated distraction. The real issue is allowing the government the power to determine how you will be allowed to run your business and who you can or must serve.

Sam

mercphoto

Sam wrote: »

Is everyone who disagrees with your position on an issue bigoted? Perhaps it's you who are bigoted by demising all who have a different opinion.

Sam

Sam wrote: »

First Bill has been around here for a long time and I do respect his opinion and believe he is a good person.

The problem I have is the concept that your (or the politically correct) position is the only one with any validity and anyone who disagrees is a (insert nasty name here).

You are asking me to accept your intolerance of people who disagree with your position.

I do agree everyone is welcome to the lunch counter, getting a pizza, shopping etc. But there are businesses and services that are not a requirement for life, and I generally fall on the side of freedom. Freedom for all. All being treated equally. Having government decide which group of people can be discriminated against versus which can not be discriminated against is allowing the government to determine at their whim which group has more rights and to mandate how you will run your business.

As long as the government is enforcing your belief system all is well, but what happens when they enforce someone else's belief system you don't agree with?

Photography is not pizza. It can as in wedding photography be very personal. Wedding photographers discuss at great length their clients and their selection of who they might accept as clients and who they will refuse as clients. I don't see this as anything different. This photographer was set up. The couple knew the photographer only did traditional weddings, yet the couple perused this photographer simply to make a political point.

Sam

So...... its politically correct to treat all people with dignity and with respect? That's PC? Seriously? I have to seriously consider that a bigoted opinion is somehow valid?

I'm done with this thread.

troopers

Sam wrote: »

To add some clarification......it doesn't matter if I agree with the photographer or not. It's her business, her beliefs and her life.

Now I still want to know if you think a Muslim cook should be forced to prepare pork chops for dinner?

I view both situations as the same. Say yes to both or no to both. Trying to say yes for one and no for the other is simply trying to have your personal views enforced.

Sam

I don't view the two situations the same. The government does not dictate a photographer what and how to photograph, nor does the government dictate a cook what and how to serve...this is freedom for the service provider. However, the government does dictate that the particular service that one chooses to provide, that said service be provided without discrimination...this is freedom for service receiver.

In my opinion, this is business 101.

haring

VayCayMom wrote: »

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/05/NM-court-upholds-gay-discrimination-ruling

due to protected status as the article states... will the couple really be happy with the pictures IF they do hire this lady? I doubt they will hire her now. Bummer she has to pay their legal fees too.

I guess the key is this: "The court responded: "The Ku Klux Klan is not a protected class. Sexual orientation, however, is protected.""

Moogle Pepper

I was unfortunate enough to have to deal with something like this. Although thankfully it did not go as far as legal action. Posted a thread here about it a while ago.

I was contacted by a couple, both lesbians, and after some calls and emails later. And a spontaneous email from one of the mothers wanting to to network with me as she was a beginning wedding planner, I began to realize that this wouldn't work out. The couple was way to demanding and overbearing, but also under budget who said they were doing everything they can to get to my starting price at that time. I can deal with hard couples, but, from the emails and phone calls I knew they were picking on every word.

So even though it was a week after they first contacted me, I did my best to politely tell them that we just work not work out well. And that's when the shitstorm came. Fake negative reviews cropped up everywhere claiming that I did a shitty job when... I didn't even shoot their wedding. Thankfully the wedding sites and yelp were kind enough to delete those reviews.

Case aside: There are things that I learned from this. Notably, to improve my communication with my clients. But that's a good thing all around. That no matter what may happen after turning down a client, I need to step back and reassess the whys and how comes.

Sam, as trooper says, it is moreso the discrimination against the couple then government getting in the way. I say that loosely, as I don't know the photographer or if she has any prejudices. What she could have stated was that she has moral problems with such, she could have helped by finding the right photographer for the said couple.

Jamesbjenkins

mercphoto wrote: »

I'm trying to wrap my head around how a professional cannot give their full, best effort in a situation like this. Really? Childish.

So, having an ideology and world view that influences my professional decisions is childish?

That's about the most willfully ignorant comment I've heard on this topic.

It has nothing to do with "cannot", it's "will not". What's the point of saying you believe something if it doesn't influence your behavior???

Jamesbjenkins

mercphoto wrote: »

I have to seriously consider that a bigoted opinion is somehow valid?

Yes you do. You don't get to decide what's "bigoted".

This whole discussion is exactly the same premise as compelling Catholic institutions to pay for their employees' birth control. The government cannot compell a private entity to perform an action or service that violates their belief system. Period.

rexbobcat

I think that there needs to be some kind of regulation. The type of and amount of that regulation will always (see: eternally) be scrutinized and questioned, but the fact of the matter is that humans can't be trusted to govern themselves effectively...so...there needs to be some kind of checks and balances even in capitalism. I have to agree with the courts.

Unless the photographer had a "Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone" clause in the contract, then their case just would not stand up well in court. I mean, it's not my job to make guesses about your personal opinions. That's your job to state them beforehanrd so that nobody's time gets wasted. It probably wouldn't be good for business, but then again refusing service on an individual basis isn't good for business either.

But I'm also biased because I know a few homosexual couples who have had to couch hop, because they have had a hard time finding an landlord who will allow them to rent an apartment. They didn't go to court, because it would cost more money than they had, but I still think it's wrong.

But I digress. I have very few personal prejudices when it comes to dealing with people; what people do behind closed doors doesn't usually affect me directly (or indirectly for that matter), so I don't have many qualms when dealing with people. I'm not a Christian but I wholeheartedly believe in blaming the sin and not the sinner. From first impression I like to think that people are not their problems until I realize otherwise.

I just think that it's a happier way to live.