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.
Woah, woah, I don't think so buddy. Birth control isn't just "condoms for women who wanna hook up", it's also:
1. A treatment for related disorders such as endometriosis
2. Better protection against pregnancy for women who are physically incapable of bringing a child to term.
This is also why the government needs to make anti-discrimination laws - to protect people from short-sighted priests who don't understand health care. My argument here is the same as the wedding photography: If you have a problem providing health care to certain people, DON'T GET INTO THAT BUSINESS!
So, having an ideology and world view that influences my professional decisions is childish?
"Childish" is not the most approrpriate word to use...."unprofessional" is a better word.
I agree with mercphoto that a professional photographer has an obligation to deliver "their full, best effort" in every situation despite his/her beliefs. No doubt one's ideology and world view influences him/her (that's human nature and unavoidable) but to intentionally provide less than one's ability is very un-professional.
Being a professional photographer is more than the ability to create a gorgeous image (for financial compensation), there is expectation that one behaves and conducts their business as a professional. This applies for every industry.
In my real job, I am a professional as licensed and regulated by the state. I am required to have advanced knowledge of the subject matter, and I am held to a very high level of ethical standards. I could lose my professional license simply due to lack of ethics. In fact, there was a ethics portion on the exam.
But unfortunately, photography is a self regulated industry with the title professional used loosely.
I don't believe the Government should have the ability to dictate what Jobs a Photographer should and should not take, the Photographer/business owner has to invest their money and time into thier business if it fails the business owner takes the hit so they should be able to decide what jobs they want to do.
I am a Christian and Same sex marriages go against my beliefs BUT I Also feel That it is Not my place to Judge, if the couple are nice (not being rude or being jerks) regardless if it is a same sex couple or not I will do my best for them but I do think I as the business owner should have the right to decide.
PS: I have a same sex Marriage to shoot in November and they will get the best job I can do for them
I just have to say the whole thing is riduclous. Don't take a gig you don't want to do. Simple as that. If you booked it do your best to do a good job no matter what. What a joke.
I just have to say the whole thing is riduclous. Don't take a gig you don't want to do. Simple as that. If you booked it do your best to do a good job no matter what. What a joke.
+1
That's it. The fact that we are discussing further is pretty silly.
I don't believe the Government should have the ability to dictate what Jobs a Photographer should and should not take, the Photographer/business owner has to invest their money and time into thier business if it fails the business owner takes the hit so they should be able to decide what jobs they want to do.
I am a Christian and Same sex marriages go against my beliefs BUT I Also feel That it is Not my place to Judge, if the couple are nice (not being rude or being jerks) regardless if it is a same sex couple or not I will do my best for them but I do think I as the business owner should have the right to decide.
A business owner is able to decide what jobs they want to do or not to. The decision can be based on compensation, location, hours, client expectations, etc., but the decision can NOT be based on ethnicity, weight, sexual preference, religion, etc.
PS: I have a same sex Marriage to shoot in November and they will get the best job I can do for them
Sure. Don't take the job, and get your butt sued off.
At the simple end it is just that, if you don't want to do the job don't. If you do, and the clients, you feel vibe with your work, why the heck not do it? But if you feel that you will do a subpar job, why do it, for any reason at all?
To be a professional is to also know when to say no. However, you don't leave the initial requesters hanging. You help them find another photographer who might be better with them than yourself. Twitter, social media, helps spread the word if someone is in need of a photographer if you aren't able to fit the bill.
A business owner is able to decide what jobs they want to do or not to. The decision can be based on compensation, location, hours, client expectations, etc., but the decision can NOT be based on ethnicity, weight, sexual preference, religion, etc.
As far as federal statutes go, that is incorrect unless your business is housing or banking. Individual state statutes may vary.
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.
While I am not a constitutional lawyer, this is the very concept of a "protected class" whether it may be race, religion or, in this instance, sexual orientation. Anti-discrimination statutes sound in that fashion, not from perspective of the product or service provided. In that sense I don't think that it is correct to opt out photographic/video or other services because of a creative element. I just don't think that we are different than any other service provider (whether its a pizza parlor, plumber or landlord) on that issue. IMO, the ultimate issue really is whether sexual orientation should be a protected class (and that's a debate for somewhere else!)
Sam[/QUOTE]
0
Options
Matthew SavilleRegistered Users, Retired ModPosts: 3,352Major grins
edited June 7, 2012
Separation of church and state is what this country was founded on.
On the one hand, that means that the state can't shove laws down the throats of religion. (Aside from murder etc.)
On the OTHER hand, it also means that religion can't shove it's beliefs down the government's throats, and turn them into law.
I think that in another 50-100 years, the whole gay rights thing is going to be just as embarsassing of a scar on our nation's history as slavery and civil rights is today. (Hopefully far fewer than 50-100!)
...But this doesn't mean that beliefs and personal conviction are going to be illegal soon, nor will they be "business suicide". The bottom line is much more simple: some people are considerate, respectful human beings, ...and some are prejudiced bigots. I know christian bigots, jewish and muslim bigots, atheist bigots, ...heck I know a handful of gay bigots too. Disrespect and insensitivity comes from all walks of life, not just the religious.
So on the one hand, I firmly believe that we should be allowed to let our beliefs influence our decisions in life. But on the other hand, if you're dumb enough to say something like that to someone's face, you deserve to learn a lesson. Next time, try "live and let live..."
"We only shoot traditional marriages" is a dumb and bigoted thing to say? How can one let their beliefs influence their decisions in life, something you say you firmly believe, if they can't say "we only shoot traditional marriages?" The only alternative suggestions I've heard so far involve lying (or something rather close to it), and I imagine there are some of us for whom lying would violate a core belief as well.
If the photographer declines to shoot the wedding, and doesn't get sued, is the couple stopped from marrying? (no) Are they stopped from having pictures taken at their wedding? (no, there are lots of photographers that will take the job) Are they stopped from telling their friends that such-and-such photography is, in their opinion, bigoted? (no)
So in this case, was it really the photographer who failed to practice live and let live?
"We only shoot traditional marriages" is a dumb and bigoted thing to say? How can one let their beliefs influence their decisions in life, something you say you firmly believe, if they can't say "we only shoot traditional marriages?"
But in North Carolina, not too many years ago, a "traditional marriage" would most assuredly NOT have involved a multi-racial couple. There are certainly some wedding photographers in North Carolina today who still consider "miscegenation" a sin. It follows then that, in your opinion, these service providers should have legal protection for refusing to provide service to the public based on their concept of sin, a clearly religious concept, and one that most people would consider egregious bigotry.
One of the legitimate functions of a state is to provide a secular structure and a stable atmosphere for the conduct of business, so everyone knows what the rules are and the whole public is served fairly. There is a huge difference in saying "we shoot weddings, except for those like yours" and saying "we only shoot muslim weddings." The first involves discrimination against a group. The second involves specialization. The difference is not really subtle.
John :
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
I am not a wedding photographer but find this interesting for any small business. I am not being factitious but I am curious - Do I have the right to run a Christian business based solely on Christian values?
Slippery question...can you provide a specific example?
As a small business owner and citizen of US - do I have the right to run my business and to do so openly and honestly without fear or coercion from the Government or any people group?
With photography as my vocation - it is intertwined with my lifestyle and clients (consider the intimate level with a customer), my religious beliefs, and my biblical principles and ethics in the business world - Can I operate a small business within harmony of these doctrines without fear or coercion from the government or any people group?
The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice enforces federal laws that prohibit discrimination in:
Education Housing Public Accommodations Lending Voting Employment Law Enforcement
Federal laws do not prohibit a photographer from declining business based upon bigotry. However, some state statutes, as in New Mexico, do apply. Now, they would get involved, and rightly so, if said photographer declined to hire someone based upon race, country of origin, sexual preference, etc.
One of the legitimate functions of a state is to provide a secular structure and a stable atmosphere for the conduct of business, so everyone knows what the rules are and the whole public is served fairly. There is a huge difference in saying "we shoot weddings, except for those like yours" and saying "we only shoot muslim weddings." The first involves discrimination against a group. The second involves specialization. The difference is not really subtle.
As a small business owner and citizen of US - do I have the right to run my business and to do so openly and honestly without fear or coercion from the Government or any people group?
With photography as my vocation - it is intertwined with my lifestyle and clients (consider the intimate level with a customer), my religious beliefs, and my biblical principles and ethics in the business world - Can I operate a small business within harmony of these doctrines without fear or coercion from the government or any people group?
hmmmm. Does this mean a photographer could specialize in Christian weddings? Say . . . Catholic and Baptist, no Episcopalian, no Muslim, no Wiccan, etc. That would exclude gay marriages.
There is a huge difference in saying "we shoot weddings, except for those like yours" and saying "we only shoot muslim weddings." The first involves discrimination against a group. The second involves specialization. The difference is not really subtle.
Edit: Come to think of it, specializing in Muslim weddings would exclude gay marriages also.
But in North Carolina, not too many years ago, a "traditional marriage" would most assuredly NOT have involved a multi-racial couple. There are certainly some wedding photographers in North Carolina today who still consider "miscegenation" a sin. It follows then that, in your opinion, these service providers should have legal protection for refusing to provide service to the public based on their concept of sin, a clearly religious concept, and one that most people would consider egregious bigotry.
One of the legitimate functions of a state is to provide a secular structure and a stable atmosphere for the conduct of business, so everyone knows what the rules are and the whole public is served fairly. There is a huge difference in saying "we shoot weddings, except for those like yours" and saying "we only shoot muslim weddings." The first involves discrimination against a group. The second involves specialization. The difference is not really subtle.
First and I know this will set you off Yes if someone believes interracial marriage is wrong I don't think the state should force them to participate. It's called freedom and it's messy. Freedom isn't simply allowing others to do what you condone but also the freedom to do things you disagree with.
Second the next paragraph seems to be convoluted non logic. If you can advertise you only do Muslim weddings, why can't someone else advertise they only do traditional Christian weddings?
eHarmony.com attempted to do that, and discovered you are limited in how you can conduct your business.
"Well - maybe I can ask another way - and honestly, not mean spirited ---
As a small business owner and citizen of US - do I have the right to run my business and to do so openly and honestly without fear or coercion from the Government or any people group?
With photography as my vocation - it is intertwined with my lifestyle and clients (consider the intimate level with a customer), my religious beliefs, and my biblical principles and ethics in the business world - Can I operate a small business within harmony of these doctrines without fear or coercion from the government or any people group?"
Well that's a good question. First I think it depends on ones definition of discrimination, and the laws written to protect against discrimination.
Basically you are allowed to discriminate against and person or group if they are not designated as a protected group. You may also discriminate openly by providing an opportunity / job / etc for one person with less qualification over a more qualified person simply based on race / gender / etc.
So yes some types of discrimination is not only allowed but recommended and supported by government.
This is a rather simple issue. If you operate a business you need to understand the local laws that regulate businesses. If you offer your services to the general public you have to abide by the local laws and regulations. If they say you can't discriminate based on (fill in the blanks) then that's what you have to abide by.
You may not agree with it but your agreement is not required. I don't agree with our local speed limits but that some how that has not yet detered the officier from giving me a ticket.
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
There would be less debate over issues such as this if we recognized each other's freedom to be wrong (and to suffer the consequences of our errors, in peace and alone).
Freedom should include freedom of photographers without hangups about who is marrying whom to grab that business away from those who have reservations about it. Everybody wins.
First and I know this will set you off Yes if someone believes interracial marriage is wrong I don't think the state should force them to participate. It's called freedom and it's messy. Freedom isn't simply allowing others to do what you condone but also the freedom to do things you disagree with. . . .
First and I know this will set you off Yes if someone believes interracial marriage is wrong I don't think the state should force them to participate. It's called freedom and it's messy. Freedom isn't simply allowing others to do what you condone but also the freedom to do things you disagree with.
Second the next paragraph seems to be convoluted non logic. If you can advertise you only do Muslim weddings, why can't someone else advertise they only do traditional Christian weddings?
Sam
Nah, Sam. You won't set me off. That comment, however, suggests that I should perhaps examine how I come across sometimes
Your First: You can feel that "it's called freedom" is the guiding principle here, but the laws of the land exist in part to constrain our freedom in order that such a diverse and closely packed multitude of people can get along and not crush the weak. If you offer yourself as a service provider to the public, the way you do business will indeed mean that sometimes you must do things you don't want to do, or serve people you don't want to serve.
Your Second: I think you are pretending density. If you were in Provo, Utah, I think it'd be appropriate to advertise that you do roman catholic weddings. Since the population of Provo is 88% mormon, it might be a boon to catholics to be able to find a photographer who specialized in their brand. The key matter IMO is that discriminating in favor of a small group is looked upon more favorably in law than discriminating against that same group.
I don't get this whole issue. A photographer is not being asked to endorse a marriage . . . just document it. But I digress.
John :
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice enforces federal laws that prohibit discrimination in:
Education Housing Public Accommodations Lending Voting Employment Law Enforcement
Federal laws do not prohibit a photographer from declining business based upon bigotry. However, some state statutes, as in New Mexico, do apply. Now, they would get involved, and rightly so, if said photographer declined to hire someone based upon race, country of origin, sexual preference, etc.
Right. Is there a state that alllows a photographer to discriminate?
Well that's a good question. First I think it depends on ones definition of discrimination, and the laws written to protect against discrimination.
Basically you are allowed to discriminate against and person or group if they are not designated as a protected group. You may also discriminate openly by providing an opportunity / job / etc for one person with less qualification over a more qualified person simply based on race / gender / etc.
So yes some types of discrimination is not only allowed but recommended and supported by government.
Sam
Let me be more specific...where in this country can a person be denied photography services due to his/her race, weight, religion, sex, etc?
And yup, there is discrimination recommended and supported by the government (don't get me started on college affirmative action)...best not to discuss further here on DG.
Comments
Woah, woah, I don't think so buddy. Birth control isn't just "condoms for women who wanna hook up", it's also:
1. A treatment for related disorders such as endometriosis
2. Better protection against pregnancy for women who are physically incapable of bringing a child to term.
This is also why the government needs to make anti-discrimination laws - to protect people from short-sighted priests who don't understand health care. My argument here is the same as the wedding photography: If you have a problem providing health care to certain people, DON'T GET INTO THAT BUSINESS!
"Childish" is not the most approrpriate word to use...."unprofessional" is a better word.
I agree with mercphoto that a professional photographer has an obligation to deliver "their full, best effort" in every situation despite his/her beliefs. No doubt one's ideology and world view influences him/her (that's human nature and unavoidable) but to intentionally provide less than one's ability is very un-professional.
Being a professional photographer is more than the ability to create a gorgeous image (for financial compensation), there is expectation that one behaves and conducts their business as a professional. This applies for every industry.
In my real job, I am a professional as licensed and regulated by the state. I am required to have advanced knowledge of the subject matter, and I am held to a very high level of ethical standards. I could lose my professional license simply due to lack of ethics. In fact, there was a ethics portion on the exam.
But unfortunately, photography is a self regulated industry with the title professional used loosely.
facebook.com/robertchenphotography
But the government can and does.
facebook.com/robertchenphotography
I am a Christian and Same sex marriages go against my beliefs BUT I Also feel That it is Not my place to Judge, if the couple are nice (not being rude or being jerks) regardless if it is a same sex couple or not I will do my best for them but I do think I as the business owner should have the right to decide.
PS: I have a same sex Marriage to shoot in November and they will get the best job I can do for them
http://www.realphotoman.com/
Work in progress
http://www.realphotoman.net/ Zenfolio 10% off Referral Code: 1KH-5HX-5HU
+1
That's it. The fact that we are discussing further is pretty silly.
www.tednghiem.com
Link to my Smugmug site
A business owner is able to decide what jobs they want to do or not to. The decision can be based on compensation, location, hours, client expectations, etc., but the decision can NOT be based on ethnicity, weight, sexual preference, religion, etc.
facebook.com/robertchenphotography
At the simple end it is just that, if you don't want to do the job don't. If you do, and the clients, you feel vibe with your work, why the heck not do it? But if you feel that you will do a subpar job, why do it, for any reason at all?
To be a professional is to also know when to say no. However, you don't leave the initial requesters hanging. You help them find another photographer who might be better with them than yourself. Twitter, social media, helps spread the word if someone is in need of a photographer if you aren't able to fit the bill.
www.tednghiem.com
While I am not a constitutional lawyer, this is the very concept of a "protected class" whether it may be race, religion or, in this instance, sexual orientation. Anti-discrimination statutes sound in that fashion, not from perspective of the product or service provided. In that sense I don't think that it is correct to opt out photographic/video or other services because of a creative element. I just don't think that we are different than any other service provider (whether its a pizza parlor, plumber or landlord) on that issue. IMO, the ultimate issue really is whether sexual orientation should be a protected class (and that's a debate for somewhere else!)
Sam[/QUOTE]
On the one hand, that means that the state can't shove laws down the throats of religion. (Aside from murder etc.)
On the OTHER hand, it also means that religion can't shove it's beliefs down the government's throats, and turn them into law.
I think that in another 50-100 years, the whole gay rights thing is going to be just as embarsassing of a scar on our nation's history as slavery and civil rights is today. (Hopefully far fewer than 50-100!)
...But this doesn't mean that beliefs and personal conviction are going to be illegal soon, nor will they be "business suicide". The bottom line is much more simple: some people are considerate, respectful human beings, ...and some are prejudiced bigots. I know christian bigots, jewish and muslim bigots, atheist bigots, ...heck I know a handful of gay bigots too. Disrespect and insensitivity comes from all walks of life, not just the religious.
So on the one hand, I firmly believe that we should be allowed to let our beliefs influence our decisions in life. But on the other hand, if you're dumb enough to say something like that to someone's face, you deserve to learn a lesson. Next time, try "live and let live..."
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
"We only shoot traditional marriages" is a dumb and bigoted thing to say? How can one let their beliefs influence their decisions in life, something you say you firmly believe, if they can't say "we only shoot traditional marriages?" The only alternative suggestions I've heard so far involve lying (or something rather close to it), and I imagine there are some of us for whom lying would violate a core belief as well.
If the photographer declines to shoot the wedding, and doesn't get sued, is the couple stopped from marrying? (no) Are they stopped from having pictures taken at their wedding? (no, there are lots of photographers that will take the job) Are they stopped from telling their friends that such-and-such photography is, in their opinion, bigoted? (no)
So in this case, was it really the photographer who failed to practice live and let live?
But in North Carolina, not too many years ago, a "traditional marriage" would most assuredly NOT have involved a multi-racial couple. There are certainly some wedding photographers in North Carolina today who still consider "miscegenation" a sin. It follows then that, in your opinion, these service providers should have legal protection for refusing to provide service to the public based on their concept of sin, a clearly religious concept, and one that most people would consider egregious bigotry.
One of the legitimate functions of a state is to provide a secular structure and a stable atmosphere for the conduct of business, so everyone knows what the rules are and the whole public is served fairly. There is a huge difference in saying "we shoot weddings, except for those like yours" and saying "we only shoot muslim weddings." The first involves discrimination against a group. The second involves specialization. The difference is not really subtle.
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Where in this country is discrimination allowed?
facebook.com/robertchenphotography
Slippery question...can you provide a specific example?
facebook.com/robertchenphotography
As a small business owner and citizen of US - do I have the right to run my business and to do so openly and honestly without fear or coercion from the Government or any people group?
With photography as my vocation - it is intertwined with my lifestyle and clients (consider the intimate level with a customer), my religious beliefs, and my biblical principles and ethics in the business world - Can I operate a small business within harmony of these doctrines without fear or coercion from the government or any people group?
The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice enforces federal laws that prohibit discrimination in:
Education
Housing
Public Accommodations
Lending
Voting
Employment
Law Enforcement
Federal laws do not prohibit a photographer from declining business based upon bigotry. However, some state statutes, as in New Mexico, do apply. Now, they would get involved, and rightly so, if said photographer declined to hire someone based upon race, country of origin, sexual preference, etc.
THIS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Anna,
The short answer is no.
Sam
Edit: Come to think of it, specializing in Muslim weddings would exclude gay marriages also.
Chooka chooka hoo la ley
Looka looka koo la ley
First and I know this will set you off
Second the next paragraph seems to be convoluted non logic. If you can advertise you only do Muslim weddings, why can't someone else advertise they only do traditional Christian weddings?
Sam
eHarmony.com attempted to do that, and discovered you are limited in how you can conduct your business.
"Well - maybe I can ask another way - and honestly, not mean spirited ---
As a small business owner and citizen of US - do I have the right to run my business and to do so openly and honestly without fear or coercion from the Government or any people group?
With photography as my vocation - it is intertwined with my lifestyle and clients (consider the intimate level with a customer), my religious beliefs, and my biblical principles and ethics in the business world - Can I operate a small business within harmony of these doctrines without fear or coercion from the government or any people group?"
Chooka chooka hoo la ley
Looka looka koo la ley
Well that's a good question. First I think it depends on ones definition of discrimination, and the laws written to protect against discrimination.
Basically you are allowed to discriminate against and person or group if they are not designated as a protected group. You may also discriminate openly by providing an opportunity / job / etc for one person with less qualification over a more qualified person simply based on race / gender / etc.
So yes some types of discrimination is not only allowed but recommended and supported by government.
Sam
You may not agree with it but your agreement is not required. I don't agree with our local speed limits but that some how that has not yet detered the officier from giving me a ticket.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
There would be less debate over issues such as this if we recognized each other's freedom to be wrong (and to suffer the consequences of our errors, in peace and alone).
Freedom should include freedom of photographers without hangups about who is marrying whom to grab that business away from those who have reservations about it. Everybody wins.
Chooka chooka hoo la ley
Looka looka koo la ley
Nah, Sam. You won't set me off. That comment, however, suggests that I should perhaps examine how I come across sometimes
Your First: You can feel that "it's called freedom" is the guiding principle here, but the laws of the land exist in part to constrain our freedom in order that such a diverse and closely packed multitude of people can get along and not crush the weak. If you offer yourself as a service provider to the public, the way you do business will indeed mean that sometimes you must do things you don't want to do, or serve people you don't want to serve.
Your Second: I think you are pretending density. If you were in Provo, Utah, I think it'd be appropriate to advertise that you do roman catholic weddings. Since the population of Provo is 88% mormon, it might be a boon to catholics to be able to find a photographer who specialized in their brand. The key matter IMO is that discriminating in favor of a small group is looked upon more favorably in law than discriminating against that same group.
I don't get this whole issue. A photographer is not being asked to endorse a marriage . . . just document it. But I digress.
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
Right. Is there a state that alllows a photographer to discriminate?
facebook.com/robertchenphotography
Let me be more specific...where in this country can a person be denied photography services due to his/her race, weight, religion, sex, etc?
And yup, there is discrimination recommended and supported by the government (don't get me started on college affirmative action)...best not to discuss further here on DG.
facebook.com/robertchenphotography