Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Baltimatt

Washington State AG sues florist for refusing to provide flowers to gay wedding

89 posts in this topic

So, should DJs and photographers have carte blanche to discriminate if an event goes against their religious beliefs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Discrimination is morally wrong and illegal. I am glad good prevailed over evil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the law, but it is kinda creepy a business can be destroyed over a couple bunches of flowers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, should DJs and photographers have carte blanche to discriminate if an event goes against their religious beliefs?

I don't think so but I see the point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the extent that all the florist would have had to do was arrange flowers and have them delivered to the wedding venue then I agree she should have complied, as that would not be placing her in the position of "participating" in a same sex wedding. The more difficult issues arise when it involves a photgrapher, or a DJ, or a band. Those folks would need to actually participate in the wedding and/or reception following, and in such an instance the courts would be telling a person that must actually physically take part in an event that goes against their religious beliefs becasue of their profession. I would hope that the courts would uphold their right to say no. 

 

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that persons who engage in regulated commercial activities can have their religious freedoms encumbered. Specifically the Court ruled that the Amish cannot use religion as a means to get out of paying the employer portion of SS withholding.

 

In the matter of anti-discrimination statutes, the SCOTUS has ruled many times, that the compelling interest of penalizing discriminatory acts outweighs the encumbering of First Amendment rights, specifically with respect to commercial activities.

 

SCOTUS has also ruled that assigning "expressive actions" to commercial activity would place the court in an untenable position of trying to determine the extent of expression for each business.

 

If you get paid to take pictures, your religious freedom of expression does not allow you to discriminate.

 

Remember, it is not a right to engage in business, it is a privilege allowed by the state and or locality, and regulated per State and Local laws.

Edited by karlydee2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the law, but it is kinda creepy a business can be destroyed over a couple bunches of flowers.

 

 

The business was destroyed by the owner's bigotry, and failure to follow the law.

 

Using the argument " someone else will do it for them" is no different than saying "well if they manage to make it to Canada the escaped slaves will be free"

 

it's just a matter of degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it will be challenged, but I wonder about the constitutionality.

 

As a businessman, all I see is green. I don't care if you're a man, woman, black, white, or have sex with goats. Just bring the green.

 

On the other hand, if your principles force you in denying yourself business opportunities based on certain characteristics I think the ultimate loser is that businessman.

 

I think if I were in their shoes, I would sit down with the couple for a cup of coffee, tell them that's its great for them, if that's what they want. and tell them that while its no reflection on them, my lawyers tell me its against my religion to provide flowers (pardon the sarcasm). I would tell them that I will provide the flowers, but please understand that you are forcing me to compromise my religious principles, and it is causing me a great deal of anguish. Is that what you want your wedding day to represent?

 

They might back off. They might not. But meeting them as equal human beings with dignity might pave a way - one way or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, should DJs and photographers have carte blanche to discriminate if an event goes against their religious beliefs?

They should have the right to say no thank you. Just the same as they should have the right to say no thank you if asked to photograph or provide music at a ceremony celebrating witchcraft or devil worship, both of which could violate most Christian's beliefs. I am not a particularly devout Christian myself (I have my personal spiritual beliefs but do not actively participate in an organized denomination) but if I were asked to go and photograph a celebration of satanic worship I would decline. Why should a person with a spiritual belief that same sex marriage violates their religion be forced to go take pictures at a same sex ceremony? Sorry, but public accomodation has to have some limits when it means going and being an active participant in something that violates one's beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that persons who engage in regulated commercial activities can have their religious freedoms encumbered. Specifically the Court ruled that the Amish cannot use religion as a means to get out of paying the employer portion of SS withholding.

 

In the matter of anti-discrimination statutes, the SCOTUS has ruled many times, that the compelling interest of penalizing discriminatory acts outweighs the encumbering of First Amendment rights, specifically with respect to commercial activities.

 

SCOTUS has also ruled that assigning "expressive actions" to commercial activity would place the court in an untenable position of trying to determine the extent of expression for each business.

 

If you get paid to take pictures, your religious freedom of expression does not allow you to discriminate.

 

Remember, it is not a right to engage in business, it is a privilege allowed by the state and or locality, and regulated per State and Local laws.

I respectfully disagree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respectfully disagree. 

 

You can disagree all you like.

 

It's the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have the right to say no thank you. Just the same as they should have the right to say no thank you if asked to photograph or provide music at a ceremony celebrating witchcraft or devil worship, both of which could violate most Christian's beliefs. I am not a particularly devout Christian myself (I have my personal spiritual beliefs but do not actively participate in an organized denomination) but if I were asked to go and photograph a celebration of satanic worship I would decline. Why should a person with a spiritual belief that same sex marriage violates their religion be forced to go take pictures at a same sex ceremony? Sorry, but public accomodation has to have some limits when it means going and being an active participant in something that violates one's beliefs.

 

 

A taxi driver can't deny a ride because the person is black, or because the fare is a gay couple.

 

Why should taking pictures for hire be any different than providing a ride for hire?

 

[ Hint: it's not, under the law ]

Edited by karlydee2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, should DJs and photographers have carte blanche to discriminate if an event goes against their religious beliefs?

 

They can say they disagree with their politics and refuse to play/photograph at the wedding just like the artists who refused to play at Trumps inaugural events. If they can refuse for political reasons then so should anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can say they disagree with their politics and refuse to play/photograph at the wedding just like the artists who refused to play at Trumps inaugural events. If they can refuse for political reasons then so should anyone else.

So clueless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can disagree all you like.

 

It's the law.

Perhaps. For now. Let's see what the courts say about this as more cases proceed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A taxi driver can't deny a ride because the person is black, or because the fare is a gay couple.

 

Why should taking pictures for hire be any different than providing a ride for hire?

 

[ Hint: it's not, under the law ]

So you think attending a same sex wedding is just the same as driving a gay couple in a taxi, from the point of view of the free exercise of religious beliefs? That is a profoundly ignorant comparison. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can say they disagree with their politics and refuse to play/photograph at the wedding just like the artists who refused to play at Trumps inaugural events. If they can refuse for political reasons then so should anyone else.

 

1. How would they know their politics?

 

2. I was unaware that Moby's primary activity was as a DJ for weddings.

 

3. Does the DOC have a law that defines a public accomodation the same way Washington State does?

 

4. It would be easier to just say they have a potential booking conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So clueless.

Sometimes you do seem that way professor. But of course the free exercise of religion is something that liberals like you only want to allow when the religious beliefs don't conflict with your political agenda. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. How would they know their politics?

 

2. I was unaware that Moby's primary activity was as a DJ for weddings.

 

3. Does the DOC have a law that defines a public accomodation the same way Washington State does?

 

4. It would be easier to just say they have a potential booking conflict.

 

Yes, that too.  They should never claim it was because the couple is gay.

 

Forcing someone to perform at an event that they oppose for whatever reason borders on involuntary servitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you think attending a same sex wedding is just the same as driving a gay couple in a taxi, from the point of view of the free exercise of religious beliefs? That is a profoundly ignorant comparison.

 

What's so different about attending a same-sex wedding as opposed to any other wedding? Could one refuse to do a Catholic or Jewish or Muslim wedding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's so different about attending a same-sex wedding as opposed to any other wedding? Could one refuse to do a Catholic or Jewish or Muslim wedding?

A devout Catholic is not permitted to enter any church other than a Catholic sanctuary, so a Catholic photographer would be barred by his/her religion from stepping foot inside a temple, a Mosque, or a Protestant church for any kind of wedding. Should such a person be prosecuted for following the tenants of Catholicism and refusing to participate in a straight wedding?

 

I have personally known Catholics who felt they could not attend a friend's funeral service because it was being held in a Protestant church. Even though this particular tenant of the Catholic church may not be widely followed by all Catholics, it still exists (or did at the time that I had that experience). What seems silly to many of us can be a closely held belief by others, and in my humble opinion a person's beliefs should be respected and not forced to be ignored. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Lord!  Agree to do the wedding for free and let them know that bibles and Christian tracks will be front and center on the wedding table.  DONE1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A devout Catholic is not permitted to enter any church other than a Catholic sanctuary, so a Catholic photographer would be barred by his/her religion from stepping foot inside a temple, a Mosque, or a Protestant church for any kind of wedding. Should such a person be prosecuted for following the tenants of Catholicism and refusing to participate in a straight wedding?

 

I have personally known Catholics who felt they could not attend a friend's funeral service because it was being held in a Protestant church. Even though this particular tenant of the Catholic church may not be widely followed by all Catholics, it still exists (or did at the time that I had that experience). What seems silly to many of us can be a closely held belief by others, and in my humble opinion a person's beliefs should be respected and not forced to be ignored.

 

And some Jews will not enter a church.

 

Sounds like those folks are in the wrong business if they purport to provide wedding services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0