Comments about ‘Religious liberty and gay marriage collide as New Mexico photographer loses case’

Return to article »

Poll: 85% agree that photographer should have right to say no

Published: Thursday, Aug. 22 2013 11:05 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Eugene, OR

And the meltdown here begins in 3,2,1...

Salt Lake City, UT

Unfortunately the gay rights groups only believe in their rights and not those who are different. They don't tolerate those who are different and the Democrats have given them the power to bully those who don't see the world like they do.

Puyallu, Wa.

It’s amazing how many people think their religious beliefs should be the tail that wags the dog when it comes to civil rights. The court made the right decision.

Bob K
porland, OR

Without a back story on whether she had been a public figure against marriage equality, and telling us exactly what she said to the prospective couple, we can't say much for sure, other than noting it is illegal for a business to discriminate in New Mexico.
If the woman had said, "I can't say no, but, since my heart will not be in it due to my beliefs, I would rather you got someone else." --- most Gay folks would say thanks and leave.
If she openly flouted the law, if she made the mistake of saying that she was a Christian and would not do it (implying that they are not Christians), if she brought up the Bible, etc etc
--- she belongs in court being sued.
If you don't agree, think about "I'm a Baptist and we don't serve mormons" (in a State where discrimination is illegal)

Glendora, CA

"Tolerance" seems to be a one-way street.

NotInMiami, FL

"The idea that free people can be 'compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives' as the 'price of citizenship' is a chilling and unprecedented attack on freedom."

Exactly, this is chilling. As unfortunate as other recent same-sex rulings have been, this is one of the worst because it punishes people for their moral and religious convictions.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

My gay friends said this would never happen.
They said there is no "agenda."
They said they are not militant.
They say the courts would never DEMAND that churches perform same-gender wedding ceremonies in their chapels, synagogs and temples.


Once again, the high court disregards the constitution.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

apparently the NM supreme court is unaware of the supremecy clause of the US constitution and the religious rights granted by the 1st amendment.

Albert Maslar CPA (Retired)
Absecon, NJ

A sad state of affairs when government rules against freedom of religion and conscience. American citizens are free to pursue their lifestyles whatever they are, at their own eternal and legal peril. Courts have gone out of their way to persecute legitimate religious beliefs, as opposed to the nature of cults. There are many mistaken beliefs including by many on the religious right that homosexuality is a sin, but that is not true as only the act of homosexuality is a sin in the Christian-Judeo tradition. That sin applies to unmarried persons as well that are to refrain from sex outside of marriage, and likewise the married are prohibited from having sexual relations outside of their own marriage. Same church; different pew. Government interfering with the free practice of religion and forcing actions against religion and conscience is intolerable. America is rapidly falling away from its tradition as the land of the free as it imposes its statist religion that is part and parcel of the evolving dictatorship that is its own god. Moral decline leads to every other kind of decline and the courts are no longer the last resort as the slippery slope just got slipperier.

Centerville, UT

The Supreme Court is saying that Americans cannot allow their religious beliefs to be expressed in their work and livelihood.

The photographer got what she wanted...the ability to extend her beliefs into her place of employment. The photographer did not receive payment and was not rewarded in any way. The couple did not lose any money to this photographer, and was able to hire a different photographer. They got pictures of their wedding.

If a customer is not pleased with any level of service that a business offers, they can go to another business. Money is the driving factor of a contract in business. If a business finds that their position is causing a loss in revenue they can choose to change their business policies or accept lower sales.

It seems that everyone can receive what they want. I do not understand why a lawsuit was brought. And I do not understand the reasoning of the court, as I summarized in my first sentence above.

Far East USA, SC

If one actually looks at the details of this issue, and sincerely thinks about it, there is not a black and white answer.

Both sides have reasonable and compelling arguments.

I am torn on this one.

Mom Johnson
West Jordan, UT

What is the situation here? Had the women already paid money to the company that could not be refunded? Had everything been set and then the company backed out at the last minute? Or was it because in discussing the plans with the photographer it was determined that it would not be a perfect situation for both parties. After all, you would not want someone to take pictures at your wedding and do a crappy job because they don't agree with what you are doing, would you?. The Lesbian "couple" should be grateful, say thank you for being honest and find another business, instead of going to court.

As a business owner, I have the right to refuse services. I have a sign posted that says just that. Just like "no shirt, no shoes, no service".

Riverside, CA

And Atheism or Hinduism or Buddhism (not believing in that God or Christ at all) don't violate her beliefs? What a handy scapegoat in gays she (thought she) has found! Hypocrisy at its finest. When people own a business, they own that business's legal responsibilities, not the other way around.

Bountiful, UT

This appears to be the true end game of the homosexual community, not the right to iive as they choose, but the right to control your behavior as well.

Huntsville, UT

This decision is the only possible correct one.

"Rejecting that argument, Justice Richard Bosson wrote for the court that the business owners "have to channel their conduct, not their beliefs, so as to leave space for other Americans who believe something different."

"That compromise is part of the glue that holds us together as a nation, the tolerance that lubricates the varied moving parts of us a people," Bosson wrote in an opinion concurring with the court's ruling. "That sense of respect we owe others, whether or not we believe as they do, illuminates this country, setting it apart from the discord that afflicts much of the rest of the world. In short, I would say to the Huguenins, with the utmost respect: it is the price of citizenship."

Beautifully stated.

Somewhere in Time, UT

And thus we see that the fears of religious people are based in fact. Gay rights advocates have always claimed that so-called gay "marriage" wll not intrude on freedom of religion in this country. Thus we see that this is not true.

This whole thing is disgusting. This decision is horrible. Sometimes I think that I am not living in the country in which I was born.

Sioux City, IA

So apparently the photographer needs to have a conflicting event on their schedule in order to refuse doing it without it being discrimination. The solution is to fill your schedule with fictitious events and then replace them as you get events you are willing to photograph.

From Ted's Head
Orem, UT

So, in what circumstances can a "commercial business" refuse anyone as a client or customer?

And is the key to being a commercial business that one actively "solicits" for business? If so, what about someone who works on a referral basis only? They don't advertise or market themselves, but have a business license and do such good work that their customers tell their friends about them?

I don't think we've heard the end of this story.

Bountiful, UT

If protection of traditional marriage is something you value be grateful that gay relationships are getting more respect.

No longer do gay people feel compelled to marry somebody of the opposite sex. They now stick to their own kind. Contrary to what some say, this change is a protection of traditional marriage in that our daughters will no longer find themselves in marriages where the husband can't appreciate them as a wife with her wondering why or eventually finding out why.

No longer will women be at risk that their husbands will leave them to go be with their boyfriend. Growing up my brothers friends mother ran off, she just disappeared. This was a big blow to my brothers friend. Later on became common knowledge his father was gay. Speculation is this is the reason for his mother leaving.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments