Why would you want to force someone to do something that they don't want to do?
They didn't force them. If you notice, they got a diferent photographer.
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
Why would you want to force someone to do something that they don't want to do?
They didn't force them. If you notice, they got a diferent photographer.
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
Heterosexual men have ruled long enough. Your reign is over. Women, gays, blacks will more than match you.
Throw "white" in there and you've got bingo!
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
In that it's his misuse of free speech in a business context that created the problem for him. We all make decisions based upon our own views, and internal thoughts. Apparently we still have that right for now.
He didn't misuse free speech, he violated equal protection clauses. Free speech is not absolute when it trumps other rights. Why the hyperbole at the end?
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
Dumbest thing I've ever heard.
I really can't help it that you've never listened to yourself.
Yes, some people are genetically predisposed to be gay. So are heterosexual, alcoholics and serial killers. My best friend, whose dick I rather enjoyed sucking in my younger more experimental days, and brother in-law are gay.
Heterosexuals, alcoholics and serial killers are all pre-disposed to being gay? I think you meant something else. And I've very happy you had a hobby you enjoyed.
They both chose to be gay, and are proud of the choice. My best friends partner is actually straight, as in he's sexually attracted to women. He just enjoys the partership of a male, can't stand women, and likes how a man handles him in bed.
Someone isn't telling the truth.
Everything is a choice.
No, it isn't. If you needed to hear the dumbest thing you've ever heard, read your own sentence out loud.
The people I associate with on a regular basis are almost all gay. Only one or two of them claim that they were "born gay". Meaning they knew they were homosexual at a young age. It's almost always lifestyle and friends that influence sexuality
OK, good for you and good for them. I know a lot of gay people also. They would all disagree with you. And, since there is a LOT of science that shows a hormonal and genetic component that happens in the womb to influence whether or not someone is gay (based on the article you linked to), you've no idea what you're on about.
Don't lump everyone in a pile. That's where we go wrong when it comes to this stuff. We're all individuals.
I didn't lump everyone into a pile, of course, so I've no idea what you are going on about.
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
Vivianne - Marriage is a preference.
Being gay is not.
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
I was born naaked. I prefer to be naked. Is a business "discriminating" against me if they refuse business to my naked self?
Of course not. The key word there is "preference".
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
So let me get this right, If I don't like someone (for any reason) and don't want to do work for the them, the government is now saying that is illegal and forcing me to do it? How is that not like slavery? This is complete nonsense.
That's not what they are saying and yes, if it were, it WOULD be non-sense.
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
I just don't agree the definition of marriage should be changed.
Actually, the definition of a marriage as one man and one woman is the new thing. It meant and does mean many other things to many other cultures, even Christian cultures, throughout history.
according to bloomberg news:.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-04-07/wedding-photographer-rebuffed-by-top-court-on-same-sex-ceremony.
"the u.s. supreme court turned away an appeal from a new mexico wedding photographer found to have violated a state anti-discrimination law when she refused to take pictures of a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple.. the photographer, elaine huguenin, argued unsuccessfully that she was being unconstitutionally forced to convey a message conflicting with her religious beliefs.
No business is 'open to the public'. It is a private and case-by-case undertaking.
Even if that were true, the rules are that there are certain things you can't discriminate on.
No violence? Just what do you think is the bottom line when the government is involved? That is what the government is - organized violence.
Simply claiming that because the government COULD use force means everything they do is by force is the intellctual silliness of saying all men are rapist because they have the equipment to be a rapist, or that all women are prostitutes because they have the ability to be so.
IOW, it's not true and intellectually vapid.
Anytime the government involves itself violence is involved. Violence is use, or the threat of, physical force or power. This is the business of government. make people fall in line under the threat of violence for not falling in line.
Absolutely untrue, see above. I highly doubt the threat of violence is there when you check a book out of the library or pay your car taxes.