Do Photographers Have Constitutional Rights? No, Says New Mexico.

April 10, 2008 by forthardknox  
Filed under News and Opinion

Update 4/11/08: New Mexico blogger Mario Burgos gives his perspective on this, A Very Slippery Legal Slope

Update 4/12/08: Also see Bloggers hot after ruling in same-sex bias case on the Santa Fe New Mexican.

…from Tony Perkins of the FRC:

In New Mexico, religious rights can disappear in a flash, and no one has learned that painful lesson better than Elane Photography. The company, a Christian husband-and-wife team named Huguenin, has become the latest victims of religious intolerance at the hands of the state of New Mexico for refusing to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony.

When a lesbian couple tried to hire the owners for their “wedding,” Elaine and her husband declined, saying that the ceremony violated their moral beliefs. To get even, the women filed a complaint with the New Mexico Human Rights Division, alleging that the couple discriminated against them. They asked the commission to issue an injunction that would ban the company from ever rejecting a contract based on a client’s sexual preferences.

Yesterday, the commission charged Elane Photography with “sexual orientation discrimination” and ordered the couple to pay $6,637.94 in attorneys’ fees to the lesbians who filed the suit. The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), who represented the photographers, called the ruling “a stunning disregard” of the First Amendment. Together with the couple, ADF has vowed to appeal.

As a private company, Elane Photography has the freedom to establish its own criteria on issues of conduct and conscience. Clearly, the commission is so consumed with advancing the homosexual agenda that it is willing to trample the couple’s constitutional rights in the process.

Perhaps what is most infuriating about this decision is that the Huguenins’ Christian beliefs aren’t the only thing opposed to same-sex “marriage” – so is New Mexico’s law. Neither civil unions nor homosexual “marriage” is recognized by the state.

The Huguenins have the right to refuse to photograph any number of things they regard as moral issues, whether it’s a photo shoot at Planned Parenthood, a poster for the Ku Klux Klan, or a keepsake album for participants in a baby seal hunt. The Constitution may offend the politically correct crowd, but it is quite clear that Americans should not be forced to promote a private message that violates their conscience.

Also see: Finding a Roommate Online: It’s illegal to ask sexual orientation, race, or religion to choose a roommate.

Trackbacks

Check out what others are saying about this post...
  1. [...] on this blog there was a post entitled Do Photographers Have Constitutional Rights? No, Says New Mexico. The subject was, of course, the New Mexico case where a Christian wedding photographer declined to [...]



Comments

6 Responses to “Do Photographers Have Constitutional Rights? No, Says New Mexico.”
  1. SJ Reidhead says:

    Thank you for your comment on The Pink Flamingo. Unfortunately the law is the law. I don’t like things pushed down my throat via the law, but that’s the way it is. I think a person should have the right to refuse service – as basic freedom, as long as that refusal is not based on discrimination.

    As a Christian, I find Elaine Huguenin’s actions deplorable because as someone who claims to be a Christian and living by the teachings of Christ, she is failing to practice love, kindness, patience, etc. I go back to the story of Zacchias. Christ went to visit with him, and not the ultra religious people. Zacchias was a tax collector (who was far more hated in Roman society than homosexuals are in “Christian” communities today). Christ chose to associate with him other than the “religious leaders” of his country.

    I am a Christian. I try to live as Christ would. Christ taught that we were to love the sinner and deplore the sin. I would rather be accused, by Christians, of “furthering an agenda” than I would be accused, by non-believers – of not being a good example of Christ’s love.

    I think it is a disgusting law. But – I think that Elaine Huguenin “was asking for it” by her actions of turning someone down because she did not approve of their life-style. She is a business person. If you are serving the public you do not discriminate. All she had to do was say she was booked, and suggest another photographer.

    Also, as a Christian, I would never allow someone like Huguenin to do any work for me. Her self-righteous behavior exemplifies everything I dislike about my fellow Christians. Frankly, I don’t see how the sin of homosexuality is any different from any other “sexual” sin. It is no different from the “Christian” who is shacking up with her boyfriend on the weekend. I disapprove of both. But, I seriously try to practice the “Fruit Salad” the Fruits of the Spirit. Kindness is one of those attributes.

    SJR
    The Pink Flamingo

    • E Griffith says:

      Elane did not refuse to photograph the women because they were lesbian, she refused to photograph their “commitment ceremony” because she does not believe homosexuality is moral. Imagine if you were asked to photograph a Klan rally, would you do it? How would you feel if the state said you were in violation of discrimination?

      And yes, it is the same. If a person who was a member of the KKK wanted me to photograph her and her child, I would not have a problem with that, despite the fact that I disagree with her beliefs. If she wanted me to photograph a Klan rally, I would not do it. That would be lending support to something I vehementally disagree with.

      Elane disagrees with homosexually; therefore she should not be forced to photograph an event that depicts a homosexual union because it implies her endorsement of it. If she had refused to photograph one of the women simply because she was a lesbian, that would be discrimination. That is not the case here.

  2. SJ Reidhead says:

    The bottom line is Elaine Huguenin broke the law and the person she discriminated against was smart enough to catch her. I don’t like discrimination. A person has the right to refuse service, but not to discriminate against anyone. That’s the law. If Huguenin doesn’t like it, she can move to another state. I also think you will find that most states have laws exactly like this.

    Have you ever had someone discriminate against you because you were the wrong color, gender, orientation, weight, disabled, or weren’t physically perfect? I have. I know what it is like to be treated like dirt and to be treated like you are sub-human.

    Frankly I don’t give a rip how homophobic anyone is, but the law is the law. If you don’t like it, change it. If you don’t live in New Mexico, then deal with it. This is the United States. No one has the right to discriminate against anyone for any reason.

    When people start saying what they think Jesus would do, I cringe. I think we would be shocked at what He would do if He were to walk the highways and byways of this country. I have a feeling a lot of “good” church people would not be very happy with His actions.

    All I know is Christ taught love, kindness, forgiveness, and salvation. I don’t think He did a means-test as to who was worthy of salvation. I think all that mattered was John 3:16.

    Guess what, I don’t approve of legal same sex marriages. I think once this happens, we are on the primrose path to some very serious problems. BUT, I do not believe in discriminating against anyone. If a same sex couple wants a “commitment ceremony” I don’t give a rip. I have a gay friend who has been in a committed relationship for 33 years. He thinks the whole thing is a crock.

    Yes, I have gay friends. I have black friends. I have Hispanic friends. I even have a friend who is a Democrat! I have aided and illegal alien mother who couldn’t speak a word of English but had a half dozen starving children. That’s not acceptable either, but Christ taught what ever we do to the least, we do unto Him.

    My Lord and Savior did not hand out a bunch of rules about who I could associate with and who I could not associate with. He taught love, kindness, patience, forgiveness, what ever we do to the least, we do to Him. I am more interested in the gay person finding salvation.

    I really don’t give a rip about all those lofty and extremely religious explanations. All I am interested in is someone who doesn’t know Christ seeing Him in me, if possible. I have my standards. I live by them. I try to reflect His love. To me, that’s enough.

    SJR
    The Pink Flamingo

  3. Out and proud says:

    I probably will get a lot of slack for voicing this but first off – I am an out and proud gay man, raised in the church and also have worked in many many photo studios.

    Yes – Elaine broke the law – which seems absurb to me – but is this lesbian couple violating her right to free speach and to run her business the way she fits? Was she really being prejudice ? If gays and lesbians go truly against her ideals – why should she be forced to work with them ? Remember being open minded is not just a one way street .

    I think it is cases like this that really damage the credibility of legitimate equal rights for all citizens .
    We wonder why the world has such a high disregard for gays and lesbians . Look at what we are showing the world.

  4. Keith says:

    Folks, some of you need to go back and study the Constitution. The First Amendment reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH…”

    Really people, not to knock anyone, but for all you folks saying you’re Christian and how much this woman’s actions offend you, you really need to go back and learn some basics about our founding documents and WHY those things were written the way they were.

    Honestly, what part of this woman’s case is not protected by the 1st Amendment? The LAW, as some of you touted, DOES protect her. The Court is in error here. Her art, her creativity, her religious beliefs, her PRIVATE practice is not subject to the same standards as PUBLIC entities are. Learn the difference. Her freedom of expression is protected. What’s next, churches? Do you also think that churches — nonprofit, private corporations under the law — should be forced to perform these commitment ceremonies or gay marriages the way a justice of the peace will have to now in 2 states? I mean, if man’s law trumps God’s law, are you okay with that as Christians?

    Secondly, Christ DID teach love, compassion, etc. But He *also* taught obedience to God’s laws, and we’re taught in His word to glorify Him in ALL that we do. Why should I, as a Christian, tout something that is contrary to His word with the very gifts He blessed me with? Do you believe that’s your place as Christians? Would you, to use a more extreme example, do a job that glorified satanism or abortion or the KKK?

    C’mon folks. You’re wrong in both your political and your religious arguments. Out and Proud probably said it best. And BTW, disagreeing with a behavioral choice is not bigotry. It is not hatred. Hatred is taking a bat to someone’s head. Am I a hater or a bigot if I disagree with my friends’ choices to get drunk or sleep around? Gimme a break.

Speak Your Mind


This comment section is for the readers of Ft. Hard Knox, a place for political conservatives to share information about online activism. We are not "fair and balanced," and we aren't refereeing a "free speech zone." Intelligent, funny, and on-topic comments are welcome. Trolls, spam, and liberal propaganda are not. We may occassionally approve a comment with an obvious lefty-slant so that we can amuse ourselves by making fun of it, but most will be deleted. (Why? Because we're busy, we have lives, and when we want to talk to you we'll go visit you on Digg or the Daily KOS.)

This is a private blog, and we reserve the right to make up our own rules as we go along. The few comments which manage to squeak by our censors reflect the opinion of the commentator, and not necessarily the staff of Ft. Hard Knox.

Hint: One sure-fire way to get your comment sent directly to the "spam" folder is to call us "racists" for disagreeing with a policy of the current POTUS or speaking out against terrorism.

Your photo will display with your comment if you use gravatars.

Bad Behavior has blocked 1942 access attempts in the last 7 days.