NM court upholds gay discrimination ruling

[William769]

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. -- The New Mexico Court of Appeals has upheld a ruling that a professional photographer who refused to take pictures of a gay couple's commitment ceremony violated state anti-discrimination laws.

The Albuquerque Journal (http://bit.ly/JSAdE5) reports the court agreed on Thursday with a previous ruling, ruling the photo studio is considered public, similar to a restaurant or store.

The New Mexico Human Rights Commission ruled in 2008 that Elane Photography violated the state Human Rights Act by discriminating against Vanessa Willock on the basis of sexual orientation. The photography studio says its refusal was not an act of discrimination, but a reflection of the owners' religious and moral beliefs.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/05/4539782/nm-court-upholds-gay-discrimination.html#storylink=cpy

[Swede Atlanta]

1. Let's turn the table on this one...........

Let's say I own a restaurant and let's say that the photographer is a clean-shaven male or is a female that it is well known was not a virgin at the time of her marriage because she gave birth to a child at age 17 and wasn't married until age 25.

I guess I could say that my religious beliefs are that I can deny to serve either one of them because the old testament forbids men from ever, ever shaving their beards and calls for any woman who is not a virgin at the time of her marriage to be stoned to death.

I wonder how the owners of Elane Photography would like that? They would probably be the first ones in line to sue because they were discriminated against for being religious. No, you were discriminated against because my religious beliefs let met treat you any way I want as long as I can hide behind my so-called moral beliefs.