By Michael Baggot
ROSWELL, NM, April 14, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a
case challenging freedom of conscience in the workplace, a family-owned New
Mexico company was fined $6,600 in attorneys' fees on Wednesday for refusing to
take photographs at a same-sex ceremony.
Vanessa Willock complained to the state Human Rights
Commission (HRC) that Elane Photography LLC was discriminating against her and
her partner on the basis of "sexual orientation." On Wednesday, the
HRC ruled that Elane Photography LLC violated the New Mexico Human Rights Act.
"The Constitution prohibits the state from
forcing unwilling people to promote a message they disagree with and thereby
violate their conscience," objected Jordan Lorence of the Alliance Defense
Fund.
"The commission's decision shows stunning
disregard for our client's First Amendment rights, and we will appeal this
ruling in state court."
"The constitutional right of Americans to refrain
from participating in a ceremony or other event because their sincerely held
religious beliefs conflict with its message is at stake. Christians could be
forced to advocate for viewpoints with which they disagree or to participate in
events that violate their conscience," the ADF explained.
California, Colorado, Connecticut, D.C., Iowa,
Illinois, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Washington, and Wisconsin have similar laws against workplace discrimination
based upon "sexual orientation." Efforts are also ongoing to
introduce similar measures on the federal level.
In November 2007, the U.S. House of Representatives
passed the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which forbids all
individuals and organizations, excluding churches and the military, from
discriminating on the basis of "sexual orientation." The
approved bill does not include the protection for "transgendered"
individuals found in the April 2007 version of the bill. In order to become law
the bill still needs to pass the Senate, and to be signed by President Bush.
"ENDA would unconstitutionally force business
owners to abandon their faith at the workplace door and adopt a view of sexual
morality which runs directly counter to central tenets of every major world
religion and thousands of years of history," argued Matt Barber, policy
director for cultural issues at Concerned Women of America.
"It's hard to imagine the Framers agreeing that
newfangled 'gay rights,' based on changeable sexual behaviors, should trump the
First Amendment."
"ENDA will require Americans to hire people they
believe to be committing immoral acts, precisely because they commit those
acts. It violates employers' and employees' freedom of religion, of speech and
association," stated Stuart Shepard of Focus on the Family.
Senator Ted Kennedy recently promised to bring ENDA
before the Senate before the year's end.
In a Thursday interview with The Advocate magazine,
Sen. Barack Obama said that he hopes to pass the ENDA and eliminate the
"don't ask, don't tell" military policy as president.
Christian Photographer Hauled before Commission
for Refusing Same-Sex Job
By John Jalsevac
New Mexico, January 30, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The
case of a Christian photographer who refused to photograph a same-sex
"commitment ceremony", was heard before the New Mexico Human Rights
Division on Monday.
A same-sex couple asked Elaine Huguenin, co-owner with
her husband of Elane Photography, to photograph a "commitment
ceremony" that the two women wanted to hold. Huguenin declined because her
Christian beliefs are in conflict with the message communicated by the
ceremony.
The same-sex couple filed a complaint with the New
Mexico Human Rights Division, which is now trying Elane Photography under state
antidiscrimination laws for sexual orientation discrimination.
The Alliance Defense fund (ADF), a legal alliance that
is dedicated to defending and protecting religious freedom, sanctity of life,
marriage, and family, is currently defending Elane Photography.
"On Monday we defended Elane Photography in
court, saying basically that no person should be required to help others
advance a message that they disagree with," ADF Senior Counsel and Senior
Vice-President of the Office of Strategic Initiatives, Jordan Lorence, told
LifeSiteNews in an interview today. "That's a basic First Amendment
principle. The government is punishing Elaine photography for refusing to
take photos which obviously advance the messages sent by the same-sex ceremony
- that marriage can be defined as two women or two men."
In their complaint the homosexual couple has sought
for an injunction against Elane Photography that will forbid them from ever
again refusing to photograph a same-sex ceremony. They have also requested
attorney's fees.
"Depending on how far up the ladder this goes of
appeal that could be a lot of money," said Lorence. "Hundreds of
thousands of dollars."
Lorence said that the ADF is framing its case in a
similar fashion to the 1995 Supreme Court "Hurley" Case.
"In the Boston St. Patrick's Day Parade case the US Supreme Court said
that the State of Massachusetts could not punish a privately run parade because
it refused to allow a homosexual advocacy group in to carry banners and signs
in the parade. They said that would be compelled speech, ordering the
parade organizers to help promote a message they do not want to promote.
To apply the discrimination law that way violates freedom of speech. We
are making a similar kind of argument in this case."
Lorence said that this current case is demonstrative
of a "tremendous threat" facing those with traditional views on
marriage and family.
"I think that this is a tremendous threat to
First Amendment rights. Those who are advocating for same-sex marriage and for
rights based upon sexual orientation keep arguing, 'We are not going to apply
these against churches. We are going to protect people's right of
conscience. We are all about diversity and pluralism.'"
But, in practice, says Lorence, "Business owners
with traditional views or church owners with traditional definitions of
marriage are now vulnerable for lawsuits under these nondiscrimination
laws. There are 20 states that have these laws where they ban sexual
orientation discrimination. Most of the major cities in the United States
also have these kinds of ordinances. So these are a big threat, as the
federal government debates whether to make this a blanket nationwide law.
"We see that these [non-discrimination laws] are
not rectifying some unjust discrimination, but being used to punish those who
speak out in favor of traditional marriage and sexual restraint," he
concluded.
Lorence said that the ADF is "cautiously
optimistic that the commission will do the right thing." If the New Mexico
Commission, however, decides against Elane Photography, Lorence said that the
ADF would appeal the decision all the way up to the US Supreme Court if
necessary.