It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Mexico Supreme Court effectively ends religious liberty for individuals

page: 9
20
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedCairo
Do you guys really think the average person who happens to be gay is plotting the downfall of civilization?

No, of course not. But that doesn't mean that there aren't those who are.




posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


you could say the same about Straight people no?

to say that Marriage is a stable building block is also misleading with the divorce rate at the height it is, to say that us Gays would ruin the sanctity of marriage is absurd with the straight people who cheat, abuse and divorce. The celebrity that get married and divorced the next day, the drunken marriage etc

there is good and bad to every person, race, gender, sexuality, religion



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
That photographer is just full of pure hyperbole. Photographing a wedding or anything is not a religious practice. Therefore not protected by freedom of religion. Photographer does not perform any religious duty. If she has a problem just say that she is busy or just plain "no". Don't start making up excuses based on your bigoted views.


But their business falls under a multitude of both State and Federally Constitutionally protected notions; so regardless, they have just as much Right to refuse the job as the gay couple has to demand they do.

The problem is, the business said no to the job and are now being punished for that decision.



posted on Aug, 25 2013 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darth_Prime
reply to post by adjensen
 


you could say the same about Straight people no?

Of course! Many of the people behind this aren't even gay.


to say that Marriage is a stable building block is also misleading with the divorce rate at the height it is, to say that us Gays would ruin the sanctity of marriage is absurd with the straight people who cheat, abuse and divorce. The celebrity that get married and divorced the next day, the drunken marriage etc

I agree -- marriage is a mess, we've made a mockery of it, and the result is a society that seems to be spiraling out of control. However, I fail to see that the act of forcing gay marriage on people, when civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples would have been fine, fixes anything. It just creates more opportunity for divorce, broken families, drunken marriages, etc.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
The sad thing is, what if she told them that not to be mean or rude, but gently just to be honest? It would really suck if that were the case and she got sued.

I still maintain that if gay marriage is not legal in her state, then there is no logical law for punishing her for not recognizing their marriage when weddings are her specialty. That one element changes everything.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


it's not "Forcing" gay marriage on anyone, it's saying everyone deserves the same rights and privileges regardless of sexuality gender race or religion. it is taking any 'religious laws' out of the equation and stripping it down to it's basic form of equal rights, from that if you want to follow a religion that says not to believe in the acts of homosexuality that is your freedom and right but that wont take away anyone's rights and privileges.

if the photographer was doing this personally and not as a business she has the right to refuse service to anyone, as soon as she opened the business and got the legal documents etc she signed into the laws that go with it, regardless if you believe in them or not.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 10:22 PM
link   
How come the state can refuse gay marriage, which is the legal precedent on the topic state-wide, but a business can't? Shouldn't such rulings be limited to stats where they have legal gay marriage?



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

il
I think it is absurd to worry about what someone else is worrying about. It is silly for the government to tell citizens what they can like and dislike. i would much rather know someone dislikes me rather than them smiling to my face and secretly hating me. The whole idea is superficial. telling someone they can't voice their opinion does not change that opinion. Most places of business won't allow you in without shoes, maybe i should walk around barefoot until i find someone to sue. that would be no less bogus than the photographer being sued for denying service.
edit on 15-10-2013 by NC1979 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by NC1979
 


Saying "i wont serve you without shoes" is not the same as saying "i wont serve you because your sexuality"

that is discrimination.. indeed, it's sad a world has to impose laws for equality ( or attempts at equality) that should be something that needs no laws.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join