Supreme Court Refuses to Hear NM Photographer’s Appeal

Marriage, Religious Freedom, , , ,

An appeal from a New Mexico photographer sued for refusing to photograph a same-sex “commitment ceremony” will not be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Elane Photography appealed to the court after a lower court ruling left Elaine Huguenin with hefty fines for refusing to compromise her religious beliefs.

Recent polling has shown as many as 85% of Americans believe photographers should be free to decline photographing a same-sex wedding.

From Alliance Defending Freedom:

The U.S. Supreme Court Monday declined to hear Elane Photography v. Willock, the case of a photographer who was told by the New Mexico Supreme Court that she must, as “the price of citizenship,” use her creative talents to communicate a message with which she disagrees or suffer punishment.

…

“Only unjust laws separate what people say from what they believe,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Jordan Lorence. “The First Amendment protects our freedom to speak or not speak on any issue without fear of punishment. We had hoped the U.S. Supreme Court would use this case to affirm this basic constitutional principle; however, the court will likely have several more opportunities to do just that in other cases of ours that are working their way through the court system.”

Click here to read more.

READ MORE

Why Our Religious Freedom Needs More Protection

Religious Freedom, ,

Joseph La Rue and Kerri Kupec of Alliance Defending Freedom offered an excellent explanation last week on why our basic religious freedoms need better protection.

Even though the U.S. government has a federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act protecting religious liberties from encroachment by the federal government, the State of Arkansas has yet to pass a similar law protecting religious expression at the state level. Below is an explanation of what can happen when a state does not adequately protect the religious liberties of its citizens.

So, what happens in states that don’t have a clear [Religious Freedom Restoration Act]? Elane Photography in New Mexico is a perfect illustration.

Elaine Huguenin, the Christian owner of Elane Photography, declined to photograph what two women called their “commitment ceremony.” The women had no trouble finding another photographer because plenty of them were clamoring for their business. But the couple sued Elaine’s business anyway, alleging that it had violated a law banning sexual orientation discrimination.

Elaine, however, did not refuse the women because they identify as homosexual. She declined to photograph the ceremony only because she didn’t want to promote a message at odds with her sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage. So, Elaine asserted a defense under New Mexico’s RFRA, similar to Arizona’s current RFRA, saying that the government should not be able to force her to promote and participate in the ceremony when doing so violates her religious convictions.

Forcing someone to disregard their faith and act contrary to it violates their dignity as a person. But that’s what happened to Elaine because the ambiguity in New Mexico’s RFRA, like Arizona’s current one, allowed the New Mexico Supreme Court to hand down a strained interpretation that actually distinguished between Elaine as a photographer and Elaine as a small-business owner.

Click here to read the entire column.

READ MORE

Atheist Group Tries to Stop Students from Helping Starving Families

Religious Freedom,

A public school in Minnesota has taken flak for letting schoolchildren participate in a service project at a local church.

Students in Minnesota took prepackaged meals to Calvary Lutheran Church; the meals were prepared to be sent to starving families in Haiti. The American Humanist Association sent a complaint to the school district, alleging participation in the charitable work of the church violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution, despite the fact students did not participate in religious activities as part of the field trip.

AHA writes toward the end of its complaint,

“Very importantly, we fully understand that at least one purpose of this fieldtrip was to have the children participate in charity work intended to assist poverty-stricken people. Such good intentions, however, can be pursued in innumerable other ways that do not involve immersing the unsuspecting children into a theologically-charged environment. We are not opposed to educating children about poverty around the world, nor do we object to their participating in a nonreligious program to provide assistance. Here, however, both the church and the Christian charity involved have an interest in propagating a specific religious message that is contrary to the views of many of the students and their families.”

This statement is significant, because it treats religion like a danger from which “unsuspecting children” must be protected. 

(more…)

READ MORE