# 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:** 9
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/161 "2012-06-12T04:53:20Z")
I’m bowing out of the thread then, since if enforced that rule makes discussion of this issue basically impossible. ---
**Author:** ![OldnCrinkly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/8e7dd6/32.png) [@OldnCrinkly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldnCrinkly)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/162 "2012-06-12T05:06:50Z")
> [@NotreDame05](#): > > The answer is it MIGHT. Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has never addressed _this_ precise factual issue. In my opinion, based on my comments so far, I think under these facts, she is A.) Creating speech or expression and B.) Her taking the pictures, and what she does to take those pictures, including editorial control, results in the photographer, such as Elane, speaking or engaging in expressive conduct. > > It isn’t much of a stretch to reach the conclusion she is creating speech/expression and indeed speaking or engaged in expressive conduct under these facts. If so, then this law cannot compel her to take these pictures as it would constitute as compelled speech. > > There are, however, some rational counterarguments to this position. I agree with this. The service being provided by the business (Elane) is not camera rental. The service is photography, which is an art. Expression is the reason art exists, no? Some people have said she should just say she’s booked or make another excuse. That’s not good either, really, is it? Fraud? Lying? That’s better? If she was in the business of renting cameras, it would be discrimination, clearly. She’s an artist. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/163 "2012-06-12T05:08:51Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > Some people have said she should just say she’s booked or make another excuse. That’s not good either, really, is it? Fraud? Lying? That’s better? Could it have worked out worse than admitting she was discriminating against gay couples? ---
**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 12, 2012, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/164 "2012-06-12T05:34:21Z")
Wasn’t there a straight guy trying to sing in a gay man’s chorus on Will & Grace once? Hmm, so I tried to see if gay choruses could exclude straight men and lo and behold, **Bricker** [appeared](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=645861). The Googs freaks me out sometimes. Yeah, they’re not businesses (the one in NM is a non profit) but I’ve been mulling over this discrimination thing all day long. There are photography and wedding businesses that cater to gay couples. For all I know, they only hire gay staff. (I know there are also some Deaf-owned businesses that aim to have a lot of Deaf employees.) The idea that someone would hurt my gay friends makes me angry. The idea that people may have to put their religious beliefs aside to prevent the loss of livelihood is alarming. I could see how the photographer was shocked at the complaint. And a $6k price tag? Photographers don’t really make that much money. What if a photographer in San Francisco said they didn’t want to take pictures of a bris (well, the afterpart) because they didn’t believe in circumcision? Or more likely - can a doctor refuse to circumcise a baby because of his personal beliefs? Doctors in CA can’t refuse in vitro to lesbians, even when they’re willing to refer them to their partners. I’ve been scoffing at the religious right’s claims that the big bad Liberal Gubmints were trying to encroach upon their religious freedom, but now I don’t know anymore. ---
**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 12, 2012, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/165 "2012-06-12T05:35:25Z")
> [@OldnCrinkly](#): > > She’s an artist. Yeah, and doesn’t she have the right to make a living off of it? In order for her to operate, she has to be an LLC, but now she’s part of state commerce, which is apparently the issue here. Bit of a pickle if you’re a Christian artist in New Mexico, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/166 "2012-06-12T05:35:39Z")
nm. saw mod note. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/167 "2012-06-12T05:48:25Z")
> [@GEEPERS](#): > > No seriously, in the real world, I offer solid arguments backed up with supporting evidence. . . . You should try to do that here, once in a while. 😛 > [@GEEPERS](#): > > I speak the truth, and if I was truly spouting nonsense, these threads would be ignored and die early deaths instead of enraging the atheist hordes to attack me viciously and unfairly. Piffle. Posters wander in here, all the time, spouting nonsense about Conspiracy Theories and they get every bit as much attention as you do. Less frequently, we get promoters of woo spouting nonsense about “psychic” matters, and they also get all the attention that you have. This place has a low tolerance for wild claims that fly in the face of evidence and logic and if that is what you post here, that is the sort of response you will get. Strident nonsense never gets ignored, here. Too many posters have too much fun pointing out the errors to ever ignore someone spouting nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/168 "2012-06-12T07:31:06Z")
> [@Farmer\_Jane](#): > > Just because someone doesn’t support ssm doesn’t make them a piece of shit. It kinda does. ---
**Author:** ![Sudden\_Kestrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecd19e/32.png) [@Sudden\_Kestrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sudden_Kestrel)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/169 "2012-06-12T09:09:13Z")
Finally had time to finish reading the thread and apologize again for my cluelessness about the off-topic posts. I do have a question, however, for those of you with knowledge of the law. While searching for objective information about the case (the original ruling came down in 2008), I came across [this **PDF** link](http://www.nmcompcomm.us/nmcases/nmca/slips/CA30,203.pdf), which begins with the following paragraph. > [@](#): > > This appeal arose from the refusal of Elane Photography, LLC (Elane Photography), > to photograph the commitment ceremony of Vanessa Willock (Willock) and her same-sex > partner (Partner). Elane Photography denied Willock’s request to photograph the ceremony > based upon its policy of refusing to photograph images that convey the message that > marriage can be defined to include combinations of people other than the union of one man > and one woman. Elane Photography’s owners are Christians who believe that marriage is > a sacred union of one man and one woman. They also believe that photography is an > artistically expressive form of communication and photographing a same-sex commitment > ceremony would disobey God and the teachings of the Bible by communicating a message > contrary to their religious and personal beliefs. We conclude that Elane Photography’s > refusal to photograph Willock’s ceremony constitutes a violation of NMSA 1978, Section > 28-1-7(F) (2004) of the New Mexico Human Rights Act (NMHRA). As a result, we affirm > the decision of the district court in favor of Willock. According to this, the defendants were asked to photograph a **commitment ceremony** , which the company declined to do because of “its policy of refusing to photograph images that convey the message that **marriage** can be defined to include combinations of people other than the union of one man and one woman.” Since the plaintiffs were not having a marriage but a “commitment ceremony,” and since New Mexico law does not allow for the performance of same-sex marriages within its borders (at least from my understanding of the Wikipedia page on those laws), the photography studio can hardly claim that taking photographs of that ceremony would promote same-sex marriage, no? To the contrary, it would seem to be promoting a differently named, differently perceived and, IMO, inferior form of public commitment between same-sex partners, something many Christians claim to favor. TLDR version: How can they refuse service on the basis that they’d be forced to take photos promoting something that is not represented in the photographs and that effectively does not exist within that state? This whole foo-foo-raw reminds me of when a friend was in training to be a masseuse. She really enjoyed the classes, she said, but she would be happy when she was done with school and didn’t have to work on clients with back acne or other gross skin conditions. She soon found she could not find such clients on her own, so she now works in a nursing home. Since it seems New Mexico law is pretty clear on whether a public accommodation (which I believe includes any business that advertises its services to the general public) is allowed to refuse that service based on sexual orientation, these people might want to restrict their advertising to places restricted to like-minded citizens. I shudder to think what those places look like, though :eek:. ---
**Author:** ![Apollyon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/apollyon/32/4238_2.png) [@Apollyon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollyon)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/170 "2012-06-12T09:38:18Z")
> [@Farmer\_Jane](#): > > Yeah, and doesn’t she have the right to make a living off of it? In order for her to operate, she has to be an LLC, but now she’s part of state commerce, which is apparently the issue here. Bit of a pickle if you’re a Christian artist in New Mexico, I guess. If I understand what’s been said, being a Christian artist isn’t the issue, it’s being a Christian artist for general hire. If the form of her art involved shooting subjects of her choosing and selling the photos to interested buyers the same pickle wouldn’t arise. (She could still run afoul of the law if she refused to sell to a protected class customer, but wouldn’t be required to shoot subjects she found offensive, yes?) ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/171 "2012-06-12T10:35:39Z")
> [@Farmer\_Jane](#): > > I’ve been scoffing at the religious right’s claims that the big bad Liberal Gubmints were trying to encroach upon their religious freedom, but now I don’t know anymore. The photographer’s religious freedom hasn’t been encroached upon one bit. She (?) can worship as she see fit and hold whatever beliefs she sees fit. What she cannot do is allow those beliefs as justification to discriminate against protected classes as a general business person. She can’t make personal the professional in a way prohibited by law. If the conservative right are being encroached upon then so are the leftists, equally. The photographer couldn’t refuse to photograph a protected class they don’t like either. It’s not discrimination if applied equally and fairly. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 11:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/172 "2012-06-12T11:54:10Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Just trying to explore the limits of this situation… > > Imagine I run a horrible little church in Florida that really hates Muslims. I discover that a Muslim has set himself up running a graphic design company in my community, so I decide to give him shit. Specifically, I design “Mohammad is a demon!” t-shirts and hire his company to create the shirts. They feature a cartoon Mohammad sporting horns and a lascivious forked tongue. I make it very clear that this isn’t a jibe; this is my genuine belief. > > Surely the design guy can refuse the job? Did he originally agree to print the job and then at the last minute say “psych! You’re not getting your prints after all! Good luck finding another printer!” ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/173 "2012-06-12T12:27:09Z")
We need to convene a meeting of Atheists of America, obviously we’ve not gone _far enough_ yet. Making Christians photograph gay weddings just isn’t enough, we need to force Christians to have gay sex, or be fed to lions. Fed to lions… while having gay sex! ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/174 "2012-06-12T12:32:23Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > . . . Specifically, I design “Mohammad is a demon!” t-shirts and hire his company to create the shirts. They feature a cartoon Mohammad sporting horns and a lascivious forked tongue. I make it very clear that this isn’t a jibe; this is my genuine belief. > > Surely the design guy can refuse the job? Mightn’t he refuse it on the grounds that it’s hurtful, or hateful, or offensive, in generic terms, and defend this because he would refuse any design that said any religious figure “is a demon?” ---
**Author:** ![GEEPERS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c89c15/32.png) [@GEEPERS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GEEPERS)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/175 "2012-06-12T12:51:12Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > You should try to do that here, once in a while. 😛 Let me get this straight, I am not allowed to make mocking comments about atheists, but you freely break this rule here. Ok, thank you for proving that this forum is hardly fair to a Christian. > [@tomndebb](#): > > Piffle. > Posters wander in here, all the time, spouting nonsense about Conspiracy Theories and they get every bit as much attention as you do. Less frequently, we get promoters of woo spouting nonsense about “psychic” matters, and they also get all the attention that you have. > This place has a low tolerance for wild claims that fly in the face of evidence and logic and if that is what you post here, that is the sort of response you will get. > Strident nonsense never gets ignored, here. Too many posters have too much fun pointing out the errors to ever ignore someone spouting nonsense. Since the atheists here have made it clear their extreme hostility to the gospel of Jesus Christ, why in the world would I expect the enemy to ever give me an ounce of credibility? The replies here only strengthen my faith in regards to John 15:19 . ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/176 "2012-06-12T12:53:44Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > We need to convene a meeting of Atheists of America, obviously we’ve not gone _far enough_ yet. Making Christians photograph gay weddings just isn’t enough, we need to force Christians to have gay sex, or be fed to lions. > > Fed to lions… while having gay sex! Wait… Is it the Christians or the lions who are having teh gay sex? ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/177 "2012-06-12T12:57:05Z")
> [@GEEPERS](#): > > Pure malice? It’s pure malice for force someone to personally witness an act that is morally offensive to someone’s sacred beliefs. Would you like it if you were forced to take photographs of something that offended you greatly? I’m concerned by this statement. What offensive act are you referencing here? Compelling someone to witness two people having sexual congress of any sort could definitely be construed as a violation of that person’s rights. But AFAIK the “offensive act” is a commitment ceremony, in which two people pledge the sort of fidelity and mutual support that is the hallmark of a healthy marriage. In what way does this become offensive? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/178 "2012-06-12T13:01:35Z")
> [@GEEPERS](#): > > why in the world would I expect the enemy to ever give me an ounce of credibility?. The _enemy_, for fucks sake? Not people with opinions that differ from your own? Because I do not subscribe to your religious beliefs I’m the enemy? Why not relocate to a theocracy? ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/179 "2012-06-12T13:05:03Z")
> [@GEEPERS](#): > > You can’t just take a single scripture out of context and ignore the rest of the Bible. Romans 1:26 certainly does not forbid Christians to speak out against sin. It talks about a Christian commiting a sin while judging other people for commiting the same sin. I am not actively commiting homosexual sin so I can certainly speak out the truth. > > You also have to consider other verses that speak favorly about judging. Jesus even commended Simon for judging in Luke 7:43 and promotes judging in John 7:24. Just so we are clear on this, my intent was quite similar to the point you make – you may not take Romans 1:26-27 out of context, but must consider it in relation to the extended argument which Paul advances in the first fifteen chapters of Romans. You may not pick two random verses about judging out of context, but must consider them in the context of Jesus’s teaching about sin and judgmentalism, including his repetitive condemnation of the behavior of (a certain self-righteous subset of) the Pharisees. You appear to be drawing a bright-line us/them dichotomy between ‘Christians’ and everyone else, which is not substantiated by the teachings of either Jesus or Paul, insofar as I can tell. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2012, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847/180 "2012-06-12T13:06:12Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Pretty sure being a bottom counts too, mate. there is a distinct difference between being a bottom and being an ass. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-christians-be-forced-to-photograph-gay-weddings/624847.md?page=10)