Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I thought Christians are people who follow the teachings of Christ?
How is treating their gay and lesbian neighbors badly something that Christ taught?
There are special exemptions if the person treated badly is a member of the LGBT community. They have to be able to show how much they disapprove of how complete strangers choose to live. So things like discrimination are perfectly acceptable to those "Christians". In fact it is to be encouraged.
"Jesus may have healed you but we refuse to make your wedding cake/allow you equal rights/let you teach our children/have you as a neighbor/love you as He loved us." is pretty much their mantra. Then they cloak themselves in a few carefully chosen Bible verses to make it all OK. **sigh**
What about the right to practice your religion ?
That's where social reform via legislation crosses the line over the right to practice your religion.
That's part of the First Amendment.
It is generally a very clear line, and that is when your "practicing of religion" interferes with or suppresses the rights of others. It is a pretty simple concept and I'm not sure why it is so hard for you to grasp.
I am all for a homosexual, black, Asian, etc being able to walk into a restaurant & sit down to enjoy a meal, same as anyone else. The same goes for providing medical care to all equally (although you may have issues with payment, insurance etc). That goes without saying. But making a photographer photograph an event they don't want to photograph is taking that concept entirely too far, and a homosexual being turned down by one single photographer while many other are ready & waiting to serve is hardly a reason for activism.
To me artistic endeavors are different than, say, not allowing blacks in a restaurant. People who participate in artistic endeavors, and this includes photography, are inspired by certain things & relate to certain things, and create their creations based on their vision & inspiration of those things. They aren't compelled to create something that's not of their mentality to suit someone else's. It's called "artistic integrity."
Thus, you get photographers who don't do ANY weddings while nonetheless doing portraits. You get photographers who only want to photograph newborns. You get some who specialize in weddings. They do this because only those activities inspire them to create their creations. You can try to get a wedding photographer who specializes in that to photograph your infant all you want, but that they aren't inspired by your child & choose not to is all the reason they need.
Thus, if a wedding photographer can't form a connection or rapport with a homo couple because they disagree with the whole premise altogether, they won't be successful in making a good creation because it's not their thing, and thus shouldn't be made to do so if they don't want to. Period.
I can say this on some authority as I am a hobbyist photographer myself, and I've done little in the way of weddings, but those endeavors which I have done & done with some success, it was because I related to the event and/or the people in it. I'm not here to please the people, I'm here to photograph whatever I want to. Even if I were to go into business because I felt my skills were good enough for that, I want to photograph what I want to photograph, who I want to photograph, when I want to photograph, and for whatever reason I jolly darn well please. If the law can't respect that, it needs to be changed or even ignored, and those who advocate such laws need to be destroyed, demolished, and smashed into a zillion pieces and sent into the dark abyss of the most remote place that can be found so they can just stay out of the way. To compare this to blacks being denied a meal at a restaurant in the 1950s is just absurd. I'm not making you a hamburger at McDonald's, something which requires no artistic expression and any 16 year old can do--with that all you do is follow the steps and put the food out, you are not connecting with your customer in anyway back there in the kitchen. With wedding photography, you ARE. I'm here to express an artistic interpretation of the events as *I* see fit, and with WHOM I see fit. Period.
If the law disagrees, the LGBT people and all those idiotic judges who rule as such can kiss it, smack it, and sit on a stick & spin for all I care. Maybe LGBT should stand for "let gays blow themselves," especially if they're going to nag & harass & cause trouble this way where it's neither needed nor wanted.
LRH
Then could you please make sure all your ads say "I do weddings but only for good looking, white, Christian, straight, virgin couples who follow every law in the Bible and do not sin", so most people know not to even call you and waste your valuable time?
Then could you please make sure all your ads say "I do weddings but only for good looking, white, Christian, straight, virgin couples who follow every law in the Bible and do not sin", so most people know not to even call you and waste your valuable time?
The law is not required to accommodate your religious beliefs. Should Muslims be allowed to kill infidels? Why not? Should you be able to beat your wife or murder your children if they disobey you? No? How dare the law interfere with my religious beliefs.
On the contrary, why should the law care about your religious beliefs? You claim the right to discriminate against other because your imaginary friend in the sky says it's okay? Pffft. People who believe nonsense like that ought to be ridiculed, not respected.
It is generally a very clear line, and that is when your "practicing of religion" interferes with or suppresses the rights of others. It is a pretty simple concept and I'm not sure why it is so hard for you to grasp.
I could agree if that is the only business in the US.
But you are not surpressing someone's right to a photo or cake or party hall because there are others around.
As long as there is choices you can't be suppressing anyone.
On the contrary, why should the law care about your religious beliefs? You claim the right to discriminate against other because your imaginary friend in the sky says it's okay? Pffft. People who believe nonsense like that ought to be ridiculed, not respected.
Obamacare did with the exemption for religious groups that did not want to be forced to pay for contraceptives.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
