# 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:** 27
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/521 "2012-06-15T15:07:26Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > He’s referring to a post about religious prohibitions, not legal ones. Ah, OK - pressure within the sect. Very well. > [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Getting your feelings hurt because someone doesn’t approve of the way you live is not a violation of your “human rights.” Or just doesn’t approve of who you are. It’s true there’s an appeal to letting the marketplace settle this (letting the photographers who will photograph same-sex couples do more business than the ones who won’t), but it’s also true that these sorts of bans can amount to freeze-outs of minorities and the result is not appealing. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/522 "2012-06-15T15:15:49Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Just to be clear, you feel that a business like a restaurant has the right to not serve people based on the color of their skin? Yep, that’s exactly what I’m saying. You, on the other hand, have the right to complain to the manager, send letters to the local media, picket the restaurant, organize a boycott, ostracize the owners socially, etc. But you don’t have the right to force or the threat of force, which is what you’re doing when you drag the state into it. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/523 "2012-06-15T15:22:14Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Yep, that’s exactly what I’m saying. > > You, on the other hand, have the right to complain to the manager, send letters to the local media, picket the restaurant, organize a boycott, ostracize the owners socially, etc. But you don’t have the right to force or the threat of force, which is what you’re doing when you drag the state into it. Okay, so at least we clearly know where you stand. However, in the real world, where we have collectively decided that one of the legitimate functions of government in the US is to pro-actively prevent businesses from discriminating against certain customers based on their race, religion, and (in many cases) sexual orientation, that opinion is useless in deciding the merits of the case in question. Sorry, you can’t complain about an umpire’s call by saying you would prefer to play a different sport. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/524 "2012-06-15T15:23:19Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Ptooey. You want to use the power of the state to punish people who don’t conform to your ideology. If she doesn’t want to photograph a wedding for whatever reason, the state has no business penalizing her for refusing to do so. Barring unusual circumstances, you don’t have a “basic human right” to require others to do business with you or associate with you if they don’t want to. I just want to be clear, would this also encompass cases where ‘not wanting to’ is on account of the customer being Black, Disabled, Female, etc? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/525 "2012-06-15T15:26:51Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Yep, that’s exactly what I’m saying. So, the Supreme Court was wrong, the Civil Rights Act was wrong, and 50 years of social change was wrong? You must hate living in 21st century America! ---
**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 15, 2012, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/526 "2012-06-15T15:27:34Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Getting your feelings hurt because someone doesn’t approve of the way you live is not a violation of your “human rights.” It is legal for you to disapprove of the way someone lives. Go for it. Announce it. Disapprove to your heart’s content. Hurt anyone’s feelings you want. However, if you run a public business, and you deny service to a person because they are a member of a defined class of people, this is a violation of their rights and is illegal. Do you not understand the basic premise at work here? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/527 "2012-06-15T15:29:11Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Do you not understand the basic premise at work here? He seems to understand it just fine. He doesn’t agree with it, which is distinctly a minority opinion these days. I’m not sorry about that even though I do have mixed feelings about its application in this case, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t get it. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/528 "2012-06-15T15:40:20Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > So, the Supreme Court was wrong, the Civil Rights Act was wrong, and 50 years of social change was wrong? You must hate living in 21st century America! You don’t know **Lonesome Polecat** very well, do you? Hating living in 21st Century America is his raison d’etre… ---
**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 15, 2012, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/529 "2012-06-15T15:41:18Z")
Let’s not turn this into a **Lonesome Polecat** thread, please? We’ve had plenty already, and it was a tangent anyway. ---
**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 15, 2012, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/530 "2012-06-15T15:44:48Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > He seems to understand it just fine. He doesn’t agree with it, which is distinctly a minority opinion these days. I’m not sorry about that even though I do have mixed feelings about its application in this case, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t get it. Well he seems to think that the law is in place to keep “feelings from being hurt”, rather than to deal with public businesses who deny service to distinctive groups of people based on bigotry. The law does not give a shit about “feelings being hurt”. It does give a shit about denial of service by a public business. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/531 "2012-06-15T15:53:38Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > Well he seems to think that the law is in place to keep “feelings from being hurt”, rather than to deal with public businesses who deny service to distinctive groups of people based on bigotry. It appears he thinks bigotry in the marketplace is nothing worse than feelings being hurt. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/532 "2012-06-15T16:00:27Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > The law does not give a shit about “feelings being hurt”. It does give a shit about denial of service by a public business. That’s how he is (wrongly) describing the effects of those denials rather than, say, noting that people who are denied basic services are effectively being shut out of society entirely since it’ll be nearly impossible for them to replicate all the services they can’t use. Anyway rather than going down that road I’d be interested to hear **Farmer Jane** explain the differences between this type of discrimination and racial discrimination. Somebody has to do it eventually, right? 😉 ---
**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 15, 2012, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/533 "2012-06-15T16:01:58Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Also, the suggestion that a commitment ceremony or same-sex marriage is automatically political is just a little bit insulting. I most certainly don’t mean to be insulting! I’m not sure where you grew up, **Miller** , but I come from a place where having a same sex ceremony _is_ political. (Iowa) In fact, ssm regulations that were won through the courts started as political statements. Just like sit-ins did. > [@](#): > > I’m not sure what the fuck is up with the all-caps there, but you’re right, they probably would refuse to photograph weddings like that. And they can do that, because there’s no law forbidding discrimination against nudists or polyamorists. Anyone and everyone is free to refuse to do business with people on those grounds. They would be discriminating on the basis of religion. > [@](#): > > \*Eating at a lunch counter > \*Drinking from a particular water fountain > \*Using a particular water fountain > \*Sitting at the front of the bus No, but these are things that are open to the public. They’re physical. What the lady was providing was services. I think when it comes to ‘services’, a couple of decades ago Civil Rights law only applied to the essentials (e.g., a doctor). This is a weird country. Pharmacists can refuse birth control and doctors can refuse it in an ER but photographers are fined $6,000 for not entering into a contract with a gay couple. Finally - and I know this is unpopular - but it could also be that the photographer was physically uncomfortable with a same-sex ceremony. For a lot of people, gays and lesbians are still ‘sexual deviants’. It’s quite possible, if not likely, that filming the ceremony would have made her feel violated because she found it sexual in nature. Remember that loooong thread in which you bashed me for hating Pride parades? I’m a little disappointed that few people in this thread have acknowledged that the photographer has rights as well. I’m Jewish and I wouldn’t want a doctor to circumcise my child if he/she was against it. I wouldn’t want to force a famous musician to perform at my political rally if they were against it (and in some states, political ideology is protected). There’s no way that the government can tell everyone to play nice and be fair. It just doesn’t work. Humans don’t work that way. We have two competing parties who are in a fight for liberty. That’s serious. So I think before we start chipping away at someone’s liberty, we have to think really, _really_ hard about it. People have said that she has the right to be a bigot, but that she doesn’t have the right to enter into state commerce and be a bigot. A right to a profession is pretty standard here in the States. “Oh, you can not agree with ssm but if you don’t enter into contracts with gay couples we’ll fine the shit out of you and run your business down. Your choice!” That’s not much of a choice. It carries about the same weight as “Oh, you’re gay? You can get married…just not to someone of your own gender. Your choice!” ---
**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 15, 2012, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/534 "2012-06-15T16:09:02Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > That’s how he is (wrongly) describing the effects of those denials rather than, say, noting that people who are denied basic services are effectively being shut out of society entirely since it’ll be nearly impossible for them to replicate all the services they can’t use. Anyway rather than going down that road I’d be interested to hear **Farmer Jane** explain the differences between this type of discrimination and racial discrimination. Somebody has to do it eventually, right? 😉 🙂 I don’t think homosexuality is a choice - get real - but some people do enter into partnerships because they want to, not because they absolutely have no other choice, period. But that’s not really my issue. I don’t believe religious people can ‘help it’ either, no more than I could help voting Democrat or my neighbor Republican. While you can’t help being gay or black, the objection by the photographer was about an _action_, not a state of being. Just like I think she should be able to refuse to photograph a polygamous ceremony (which is not allowed under NM law). Now, I’d be on the gay couples’ side if the photographer had a policy of _not extending services to gay people_. She also does portraits and such, so if someone she knew was gay solicited her services to photograph them for their Realtor website or whatever, and she refused on those grounds, that’s a much clearer violation of the law. I keep saying this. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/535 "2012-06-15T16:10:34Z")
> [@Farmer\_Jane](#): > > They would be discriminating on the basis of religion. Not necessarily. You don’t have to be religious to be polygamous or opposed to polygamy. > [@](#): > > No, but these are things that are open to the public. They’re physical. What the lady was providing was services. This is exactly where this discussion got started. The photographers offer their services to the public, which is to say their business is open to the public. If the argument here is that this is different because they don’t have a building, that’s not very convincing because they may very well have a photo studio where they photograph clients. > [@](#): > > This is a weird country. Pharmacists can refuse birth control and doctors can refuse it in an ER but photographers are fined $6,000 for not entering into a contract with a gay couple. Something I’m opposed to (and which we have discussed surprisingly little in this thread). I think these kinds of exemptions have gotten out of control. > [@](#): > > Finally - and I know this is unpopular - but it could also be that the photographer was physically uncomfortable with a same-sex ceremony. Maybe. Do we need to care about this? > [@](#): > > I wouldn’t want to force a famous musician to perform at my political rally if they were against it (and in some states, political ideology is protected). You can’t. > [@Farmer\_Jane](#): > > I don’t think homosexuality is a choice - get real - but some people do enter into partnerships because they want to, not because they absolutely have no other choice, period. I’ve already made that point, and I didn’t say you think sexuality is a choice. > [@](#): > > While you can’t help being gay or black, the objection by the photographer was about an _action_, not a state of being. Yes, again, I already pointed this out. So what? Some people are opposed to interracial dating and marriage, and they justified their views based on the same kinds of grounds. So why is that action abhorrent and this one acceptable? > [@](#): > > Now, I’d be on the gay couples’ side if the photographer had a policy of _not extending services to gay people_. She does: she photographs weddings and won’t do same-sex ceremonies. Since only gay people have those kinds of weddings, she’s excluding them specifically. It’s not like she was vague or unclear in her emails. ---
**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 15, 2012, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/536 "2012-06-15T16:12:56Z")
P.S. If someone could please find the case where a white woman was shunned by her church and her pastor refused to marry her to a black man, I’d appreciate it. I think it was in TN. I learned about it on the Dope, but have no idea what happened after the story broke. ---
**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 15, 2012, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/537 "2012-06-15T16:15:56Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Not necessarily. You don’t have to be religious to be polygamous or opposed to polygamy. No, but people who practice it are doing it under the auspices of religion, and in NM, it appears you can’t discriminate based on spousal status. 🙂 So she couldn’t discriminate against that fictional group. > [@](#): > > This is exactly where this discussion got started. The photographers offer their services to the public, which is to say their business is open to the public. If the argument here is that this is different because they don’t have a building, that’s not very convincing because they may very well have a photo studio where they photograph clients. Good points. There are a lot of angles I think the photographer has, but that wasn’t my strongest. Again, public accommodations law varies from state to state…in some states, political ideology IS PROTECTED, so that means artists would have to provide services for people they don’t agree with. Artist for hire and all that. > [@](#): > > Maybe. Do we need to care about this? Yes. And I’m off to work. (: ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2012, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/538 "2012-06-15T16:18:58Z")
> [@Farmer\_Jane](#): > > No, but people who practice it are doing it under the auspices of religion Some of them are and some of them aren’t. You don’t have to be a fundamentalism Muslim or Mormon to be a polygamist. ---
**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 15, 2012, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/539 "2012-06-15T16:32:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Not necessarily. You don’t have to be religious to be polygamous or opposed to polygamy. Uh, you don’t have to be gay to have a same sex commitment ceremony…? What? ---
**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 15, 2012, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/540 "2012-06-15T16:33:18Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Some of them are and some of them aren’t. You don’t have to be a fundamentalism Muslim or Mormon to be a polygamist. Let’s just say for the sake of the argument that they are, since that’s the overwhelming majority. This is MY fictional couple here. Don’t mess it up! :mad: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847.md?page=26) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847.md?page=28)