New Mexico Court Says Christian Photographers Must Compromise Their Beliefs

What about the gay couple respecting the beliefs of the Christian photographers?  The judge obviously has a warped interpretation of the Constitution and religious freedom.  The gay couple did find another photographer so what’s the big deal?  This case shows the vindictive nature of homosexual activists.

Alliance Defending Freedom is the legal firm defending the photographers. Their attorney Jordan Lorence said they are considering appealing to the Supreme Court. I hope they do.

The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled Thursday that two Christian photographers who declined to photograph a same-sex union violated the state’s Human Rights Act. One justice said the photographers were “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.”

In 2006 Vanessa Willock asked Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, owners of Elane Photography, to photograph a same-sex “commitment ceremony” in the town of Taos. 

Huguenin and her husband declined the job because their Christian beliefs were in conflict with the message communicated by the ceremony. 

Willock found another photographer at a cheaper price but nevertheless filed a complaint with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission accusing Elane Photography of discrimination based on sexual orientation. She was later found guilty and ordered to pay thousands of dollars in fines. 

Bosson said the Christian photographers are now “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.” 

A recent Rasmussen survey found that 85 percent of Americans support the right of a photographer to refuse participating in a same-sex wedding. 

Attorney Jordan Lorence said the ruling in effect means gay rights now trump religious rights. 

“Government-coerced expression is a feature of dictatorships that has no place in a free country,” Lorence said. “This decision is a blow to our client and every American’s right to live free.” 

Lorence said the New Mexico Supreme Court undermined the constitutionally protected freedoms of expression and conscience. 

“If Elane Photographer does not have her rights of conscience protected, then basically nobody does,” he told Fox News. “What you have here is the government punishing someone who says, ‘I, in good conscience, cannot communicate the messages of this wedding.’” 

Ken Klukowsi, of the Family Research Council, called the ruling profoundly disturbing. 

“This decision may bring to Americans’ attention the serious threat to religious liberty posed by overbearing government agencies when it comes to redefining marriage,” he said. “Rather than live and let live, this is forcing religious Americans to violate the basic teachings of their faith or lose their jobs.” 

“This is very coercive, very authoritarian to crush those who do not agree and make public examples of them – and in a free society, that simply should not be,” he said.

You can read the entire article here.

This is one more example of how citizens religious freedom is under assault in the U.S.