# Should Christians Be Forced to Photograph Gay Weddings? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 11, 2012, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847 "2012-06-11T19:50:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![NotreDame05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90ced4/32.png) [@NotreDame05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotreDame05)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/441 "2012-06-14T15:56:11Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > If my advertisement says “Photographer - Catholic Weddings only”…can I decline a non-Catholic one? Whether you can or can’t is contingent upon the law in your state. However, under NM law you may and likely would violate the statute. any person in any public accommodation to make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering or refusing to offer its services . . . to any person because of race, _religion_, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation[,] or physical or mental handicap It would seem to be you are refusing your services on the basis of religion by refusing to photograph a wedding of Pentacostals, Baptists, Muslims, Protestants, or some other religious denomination or people belonging to a different religious denomination. You may even be refusing service on the basis of religion by refusing to photograph the weddings of non-religious people, such as atheists. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/442 "2012-06-14T15:59:01Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > So you see, I’m not forcing you to do anything, but if you don’t do what I say, I’ll kick you in the nuts. This is not really equivalent. “I’m not forcing you to do anything, but if you DO offer to do it and then decide not to (for a discriminatory reason), I’ll kick you in the nuts.” doesn’t sound too bad to me. I mean, that’s what we’re actually discussing–people voluntarily offering a service (in this case even making a contract for same, and then at some arbitrary point cancelling it) but refusing specific customers because of a legally actionable discriminatory reason. No one’s being forced to do anything they wouldn’t ordinarily do. They are being forced to do it FOR someone they wouldn’t ordinarily want to, who differs from a customer they would accept in a way that should not matter in the slightest. It’s a subtle but absolutely crucial difference. ---
**Author:** ![Farmer\_Jane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Farmer\_Jane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Farmer_Jane)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/443 "2012-06-14T16:01:20Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > I mean, that’s what we’re actually discussing–people voluntarily offering a service (in this case even making a contract for same, and then at some arbitrary point cancelling it) but refusing specific customers because of a legally actionable discriminatory reason. Cite? 😕 They had a contract? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/444 "2012-06-14T16:03:53Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > I mean, that’s what we’re actually discussing–people voluntarily offering a service (in this case even making a contract for same, and then at some arbitrary point cancelling it) but refusing specific customers because of a legally actionable discriminatory reason. > [@Farmer\_Jane](#): > > Cite? 😕 They had a contract? There was no contract in this case. They asked the photographer if she would shoot their commitment ceremony, and she refused because it was a same-sex couple. ---
**Author:** ![OldnCrinkly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OldnCrinkly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldnCrinkly)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/445 "2012-06-14T16:13:53Z")
> [@Sudden\_Kestrel](#): > > Consider this: When Mary Q. Public sees the photographs of her cousin John’s wedding, does she think, “Man, that guy Rory von Beecker, MFA, is an amazing photographer?” Yes, that is in fact how a person would determine which photographer to hire. Do you believe that any monkey with a camera is just as good as any other? Let me ask you this, suppose this Elane Photography went to the site of the ceremony before hand and sets up cameras. Suppose a timer is set to take a picture every few minutes. When these random shots are developed, they are delivered to the client. Would you say they have fulfilled the contract, or is a more personal (artistic/expressive) service required? I maintain that this is a mirror image of censorship. Censorship would be a punishment for including certain elements in some artistic work. This Elane is being punished for excluding certain elements. Without making any subjective judgement on the artist or the art produced, I can’t say I like the general compulsion in art production. ---
**Author:** ![NotreDame05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90ced4/32.png) [@NotreDame05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotreDame05)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/446 "2012-06-14T16:17:09Z")
> [@Sudden\_Kestrel](#): > > Of course not. > > - Not saying that you _are_ a papist, of course, or that it would matter if you were, or even that anyone calls other people papists any more. > [@](#): > > You’re right, that doesn’t make sense. It’s also not what I said. Try again Well, given the context in which you made the remark, your reasoning strongly suggests it. If you want to clarify or qualify your original remark, fine, but given the context in which you made the original remark you certainly do suggest what I provided as a parallel example. > [@](#): > > However, they are not being paid by a client who answered an advertisement offering that service to take those specific photographs for that particular client’s use. Ceremonial photographs taken by a hired professional are not primarily an artistic endeavor. We aren’t discussing mere artistic endeavor but speech and expressive conduct. Some people have qualified this as artistic speech or artistic expression but this does not diminish the elements of speech or expression. Whether ceremonial photographs by a hired professional are or are not primarily an artistic endeavor is irrelevant. The issue is whether the photographs constitute as speech or expression by the photographer or if there is any speech or expressive conduct at all. > [@](#): > > When Mary Q. Public sees the photographs of her cousin John’s wedding, does she think, “Man, that guy Rory von Beecker, MFA, is an amazing photographer?” Quite possibly, yes!!! When people see amazing pictures they are known to think or comment, “Wow those are fantastic pictures!!! Who took these pictures?” Or they may think or comment, “Wow, that is a fantastic shot. The photographer did a great job of capturing (whatever it is in the photograph).” When our friends viewed our engagement and wedding pictures they commented about the quality of the photos and inquired of us as to who took our engagement and wedding photos. We gave them the name of the photographer and they used the same photographer for their engagement and wedding photos. > [@](#): > > I’m no lawyer. I have an 8th grade education and a couple years of random college courses, but I’ll do my best. I took a look at the cases you listed and I suppose an argument that this case is similar could be cobbled together by a team of attorneys. However, a team of attorneys seems to be able to cobble together almost anything into an argument, so I don’t think that speaks to its validity. In brief (heh): I think you missed the point I was making in citing those cases. I didn’t cite them because they decide _this_ precise factual issue for us. I cited them because each of them affirm the principle the government cannot compel people to speak or engage in expressive conduct and this is especially for for speech or expressive conduct the person disagrees with. If Elane Photography does engage in expressive conduct or speech when she takes engagement or commitment pictures, as I believe she does, then the government cannot compel her to take these pictures to comply with the anti-discrimination law. Unless, of course, the Court or some appellate court finds A.) State/government has a compelling state interest in prohibiting discrimination in public accommodation, including public accommodations in which people would be forced to engage in expressive conduct/speech and B.) The law is narrowly tailored. (This assumes we have expressive conduct by the photographer but I believe we do and hopefully, the federal courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court, will decide this issue for us). ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/447 "2012-06-14T16:18:29Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > Yes, that is in fact how a person would determine which photographer to hire. Do you believe that any monkey with a camera is just as good as any other? No, but I also don’t think Motel 6 is as good as the Waldorf-Astoria. The same is true of any commercial enterprises; some are better than others. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/448 "2012-06-14T16:24:44Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > This Elane is being punished for excluding certain elements. I haven’t read every single post in this exchange, but this seems like a warped reading of the situation to me. She’s not being punished for leaving out certain elements in her artwork. She’s being punished for refusing to do business with certain groups of people. The issue would be the same if she were a tax attorney, plumber, or non-artistic profession of your choice. ---
**Author:** ![OldnCrinkly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OldnCrinkly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldnCrinkly)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/449 "2012-06-14T16:28:47Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > No, but I also don’t think Motel 6 is as good as the Waldorf-Astoria. The same is true of any commercial enterprises; some are better than others. So what qualities differentiate photographers? Might it be the expressiveness of the images? ---
**Author:** ![OldnCrinkly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OldnCrinkly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldnCrinkly)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/450 "2012-06-14T16:39:10Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I haven’t read every single post in this exchange, but this seems like a warped reading of the situation to me. She’s not being punished for leaving out certain elements in her artwork. She’s being punished for refusing to do business with certain groups of people. The issue would be the same if she were a tax attorney, plumber, or non-artistic profession of your choice. I can’t say that she does refuse to do business in general with gay people. She does not wish to accept the commission for this particular type of ceremony. I also believe that since photography is an inherently artistic endeavor, it is different from a non-artistic profession. Art is expression. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/451 "2012-06-14T16:39:15Z")
IMHO - while I might appreciate the artistic quality of the photographs, its going to take quite a leap (in a wedding/ceremony situation) to decide that the quality is somehow indicative of that persons ‘feelings or position’ on the subject at hand - gay marraige./commitment, etc. IOW, I will judge the competency of the photographer based on the content of the photos, but I do not think I would - usually - judge what the photographer ‘believed or supported’. (unless they clearly went to some length to make the quality of SSM photos clearly worse/better than photos at a ‘traditional’ wedding)). Clearly, there are some cases where teh quality/type/content of a photograph specifically speaks to the artists voice - but those are generally not the ones done for “hire”. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/452 "2012-06-14T16:46:04Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > So what qualities differentiate photographers? Might it be the expressiveness of the images? None, as far as I’m concerned. I’ve been to nearly 40 weddings in the last 10 years and looked at just as many wedding albums and they’re all more or less identical. Including mine, although my wife is of course much hotter than any other woman in the world. 😉 That’s beside the point, though; a hotel is just as capable of expressive conduct as a photographer. Why should the latter get special treatment? ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/453 "2012-06-14T16:51:19Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > So what qualities differentiate photographers? Might it be the expressiveness of the images? Their slope, for the most part, as long as they are continuous and don’t have infinite slope. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/454 "2012-06-14T16:59:49Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > I can’t say that she does refuse to do business in general with gay people. She does not wish to accept the commission for this particular type of ceremony. Her exact words were “we photograph tradiitional weddings” and “we do not photograph same-sex weddings.” You are insisting on a distinction without a difference here. > [@](#): > > I also believe that since photography is an inherently artistic endeavor, it is different from a non-artistic profession. Art is expression. She and her husband are photographers for hire. Clearly there are both artistic and non-artistic elements here. ---
**Author:** ![OldnCrinkly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OldnCrinkly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldnCrinkly)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/455 "2012-06-14T17:03:51Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > None, as far as I’m concerned. I’ve been to nearly 40 weddings in the last 10 years and looked at just as many wedding albums and they’re all more or less identical. [QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright; 15167459] No, but I also don’t think Motel 6 is as good as the Waldorf-Astoria. The same is true of any commercial enterprises; some are better than others. [/QUOTE] Either any monkey with a camera is as good as another or they are not. :dubious: Please see my post #445 for a hypothetical, and let me know what you think. ---
**Author:** ![OldnCrinkly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OldnCrinkly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldnCrinkly)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/456 "2012-06-14T17:07:56Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Her exact words were “we photograph tradiitional weddings” and “we do not photograph same-sex weddings.” You are insisting on a distinction without a difference here. > She and her husband are photographers for hire. Clearly there are both artistic and non-artistic elements here. So, do you contend that the fact that they are getting paid negates the artistic nature of the business? I’m not sure what you are getting at here. ---
**Author:** ![OldnCrinkly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OldnCrinkly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldnCrinkly)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/457 "2012-06-14T17:10:46Z")
> [@simster](#): > > Clearly, there are some cases where teh quality/type/content of a photograph specifically speaks to the artists voice - but those are generally not the ones done for “hire”. Do you really think so? I would think those would be the most sought after qualities in a photographer “for hire”. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/458 "2012-06-14T17:11:22Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > I also believe that since photography is an inherently artistic endeavor, it is different from a non-artistic profession. Art is expression. She can express herself any way she wants. It’s when she decides to exchanges services for money that she stops being an “Artist” and starts being a “Artist for Hire”. Once you do that, you make an agreement with society at large. You are free be discriminating in the jobs you take, but NOT based on a few clearly defined factors like race, sex, religion and sexuality. If you can’t suck it up and accept jobs without discriminating on those factors, don’t go into business. Nobody is forcing these people to be professional photographers for hire, it is their choice. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/459 "2012-06-14T17:11:29Z")
There are artistic photographers who go out into the world and take images of things/people, and then sell these photographs to the public. There are commercial photographers who contract with a client to take pictures of a specific person, item or event. These photos may or may not contain artistic elements, but the primary purpose is to document the person, item or event. These folks fall into the latter category. They offer a service to take photographs of an event/person. If they refused to take photos of a gay person in the course of artistically photographing things/people in the world for later re-sale? No problem - it is their free choice. However if they offer a commercial service to the public, and refuse service to someone in a protected class because they are members of that class? No. They cannot do this, as it is against the law. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2012, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/460 "2012-06-14T17:12:08Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > So, do you contend that the fact that they are getting paid negates the artistic nature of the business? I’m not sure what you are getting at here. That it’s not just art, it’s also business. She’s not being required to photograph things a certain way or take particular pictures. She’s being told her business cannot discriminate against classes of customers. This would be a non-issue if there were no commercial aspect to her business and she was taking pictures at weddings only because she enjoyed it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847.md?page=22) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847.md?page=24)