Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-23-2014, 11:27 PM
 
650 posts, read 513,894 times
Reputation: 53

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiker45 View Post
Taking him to court, as was done in New Mexico:

N.M. Supreme Court: Photographers Can't Refuse Gay Weddings | Gleanings | ChristianityToday.com

The article says:

In a closely watched case on gay rights, religious freedom, artistic freedom, the speech rights of businesses, and a host of other legal hot button issues, the New Mexico Supreme Court today ruled that wedding photographers could not refuse to shoot gay ceremonies.

"When Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the [New Mexico Human Rights Act, or NMHRA] in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races," the court said in a unanimous verdict.

Do you think this ruling was correct?
Its a farce no different then trying to sue the Stones or a Comedian or DJ for not preforming anywhere.

the decisions are twisted in order to shut the movement up with all their costly stupid noise,

besides if this is a political issue being discussed its politics instead of ( the softy rel crowd.

Last edited by alexcanter; 02-24-2014 at 12:54 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-23-2014, 11:35 PM
 
Location: Hyrule
8,390 posts, read 11,597,224 times
Reputation: 7544
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter View Post
Its a farce no different then trying to sue the Stones or a comedian for not preforming anywhere.

the decisions are twisted in order to shut the movement up with all their costly stupid noise,

besides if this is a political issue being discussed take over to politics instead of ( hiding behind the softy rel crowd...where social moral opinion is guess what allowed. Cry babies get what they deserve.
That's the thing, it's religiously influenced, and only influenced by a belief in a higher power.

If an unproven God has given you unproven rules to follow, then the law will enforce that law, that you've said, that your God said, or had written down by a human in a book that you must follow. If it's a homosexual or a one armed man it doesn't matter, what ever your God has said was a no no. No proof needed of course, we will take your word for it because said God doesn't make appearances.

The fact that this would even be political is really stupid. It only belongs here. That's whats ridiculous. Get it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2014, 11:43 PM
 
6,324 posts, read 4,320,590 times
Reputation: 4335
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
I think the photographer should counter sue for emotional trauma and terrorist threats. They were attempting to force him to do something he was incapable of doing.
He's not "incapable" of taking pictures. He just doesn't wanna. Because he's a bigot.

Plain and simple.

End of story.

Now, maybe if we didn't have all of these ridiculous and primitive religious beliefs floating around, we wouldn't have so many excuses to be rude and insensitive to each other - and far fewer reasons to fight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2014, 11:47 PM
 
Location: Hyrule
8,390 posts, read 11,597,224 times
Reputation: 7544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina View Post
He's not "incapable" of taking pictures. He just doesn't wanna. Because he's a bigot.

Plain and simple.

End of story.
Ya, I'll have to second this one. Since when do religious beliefs take precedence in reality! As far as I've seen no God has flown down and proved anyone should refuse service according to his law so why would we take this as anything but bigotry by excuse?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2014, 11:56 PM
 
650 posts, read 513,894 times
Reputation: 53
Creative arts are creative arts, yuh can't call up The Stones and make demands.

An artist is not obliged to explain anything, No thanks...anything more/ get outta my hair.

He should have a manager ( acting with reply -no thanks , good day) and exactly, there should be a counter claim for disrupting the abilities, which find themselves in what could only be an understanding of some freedom in society. A pro photographer is clearly preforming in the creative . The whole thing is a hoax, Im not saying anything new everybody knows. ( whats the judge going to say...ok You, whats the big idea anyway, you go take the pics now and if they are not nice you'll find your butt with another law suite , ya ok. The action contradicts itself and shouldn't even be heard.

Last edited by alexcanter; 02-24-2014 at 01:26 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2014, 02:15 AM
 
6,324 posts, read 4,320,590 times
Reputation: 4335
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter View Post
Thats exactly right and the guys in politics will quickly point that out. It has nothing to do with rel at all.
Nooooo, of course not. I mean, just because religion is the whole reason why this court case is even taking place certainly doesn't mean religion has anything to do with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter View Post
Photography is widely known to be within the creative arts. There is no question,
Doesn't matter. Discrimination is discrimination.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter View Post
the action should not even be filed or heard,
Why? Because it makes Christianity look like pre-packaged bigotry? Yeah, if I were a Christian, I'd want to sweep that under the rug, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter View Post
the photographer has already advised / not inspired.
If he were photographing MY wedding, you bet I would be advising him. My wedding isn't the appropriate time to go "experimenting" with his creative muses ... not unless I give him permission.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter View Post
no inspiration = no pro product
He's a wedding photographer, not Leonardo Da Vinci. He's not getting paid to paint the Sistine Chapel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alexcanter View Post
unless there is some kind of different math going around , I donno. The whole thing is a farce.
Imagine if Rosa Parks was never seen as anything more than an uppity black lady who refused to sit at the back of the bus or if Susan B. Anthony was never seen as anything but a presumptuous woman who had the farcical notion of voting?

Like I said before, you're not seeing the big picture. This is precisely the kinds of actions that need to be taken if one is to really push for change. Of course, I'm pretty sure you don't want things to change in terms of gays, but a majority of us do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2014, 02:43 AM
 
650 posts, read 513,894 times
Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina View Post
Nooooo, of course not. I mean, just because religion is the whole reason why this court case is even taking place certainly doesn't mean religion has anything to do with it.



Doesn't matter. Discrimination is discrimination.



Why? Because it makes Christianity look like pre-packaged bigotry? Yeah, if I were a Christian, I'd want to sweep that under the rug, too.



If he were photographing MY wedding, you bet I would be advising him. My wedding isn't the appropriate time to go "experimenting" with his creative muses ... not unless I give him permission.



He's a wedding photographer, not Leonardo Da Vinci. He's not getting paid to paint the Sistine Chapel.



Imagine if Rosa Parks was never seen as anything more than an uppity black lady who refused to sit at the back of the bus or if Susan B. Anthony was never seen as anything but a presumptuous woman who had the farcical notion of voting?

Like I said before, you're not seeing the big picture. This is precisely the kinds of actions that need to be taken if one is to really push for change. Of course, I'm pretty sure you don't want things to change in terms of gays, but a majority of us do.

And what makes you think that a forced photographer would even hear the particular wish's of the wedding people, who just took him or would, into a formal court hearing and demanded that he or she preformed the pro picture taking ?

therefore any force used to cause the photographer to produce profpictures -is a contradiction to the skilled photo's in mind from the outset. Especially if there are extra doo's and da's in mind.

once the photographer is forced, the product cannot be anything but...forced, which without doubt contradicts not only the product, but the customers alleged expectations in professionalism within the arts selecting the pro .

Its a hoax. People in the arts don't reply to demands. An actor is not forced to take on any script, there is no end to examples. All they need to do is say , no thanks and have a good day. An interior decorator, no thanks have a nice day.

Last edited by alexcanter; 02-24-2014 at 03:18 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2014, 02:46 AM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,816,250 times
Reputation: 18304
So don't do business in New Mexico.In most states you have right to refuse service to anyone for any reason even being anti=gay; its that what a boycott really is;refusing to buy based of belief.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2014, 02:51 AM
 
16,431 posts, read 22,189,163 times
Reputation: 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by hiker45 View Post
Would it be OK for a photographer to refuse to take pictures at a gay wedding because his religion teaches that homosexuals should not get married?
Yes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2014, 02:53 AM
 
16,431 posts, read 22,189,163 times
Reputation: 9623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina View Post
Because he's a bigot.
You're making bigot a good word.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:50 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top