As a continuation of a previous post, the right of gay couples to form a lifelong commitment continues to create dilemmas for society.
Consider the case of case of Vanessa Willock v. Elane Photography.
Willock, in the midst of planning her wedding to her girlfriend, sent the photography company an e-mail request to shoot the commitment ceremony. Elaine Huguenin, who owns the company with her husband, replied: "We do not photograph same-sex weddings. But thanks for checking out our site! Have a great day!"
Willock filed a complaint, and at the hearing she explained how she felt.
"A variety of emotions," she said, holding back tears. "There was a shock and anger and fear. ... We were planning a very happy day for us, and we're being met with hatred. That's how it felt."
So in this age of political correctness, "Have a great day!" is seen as "hatred" toward gays. This isn't a situation where the photographer showed up the day of the wedding and refused to perform their contracted duties. This was in response to an e-mail enquiry months prior to the wedding.
The photographers lost the case and have been order to pay $6,600 to the happy couple. And it's happening more and more. In Washington, the 7th state to permit same sex marriage, individuals have filed 48 complaints with Washington's Human Rights Commission alleging discrimination in public accommodations.
I'm fine with the concept of two people whose love for each other lead them to want to form a lifetime union. But before you hit me over the head with laws granting everyone the right to marry, let's talk about how we are going to protect everyone's rights. Including the right of a church, florist, photographer, whoever, to not participate in the wedding.
After all, isn't the core issue here equal rights for EVERYONE?
1 comment:
There's to kinds of crazy. One gets naked in the middle of a field and howls at the moon. The other one does it in your living room. The first one you can ignore. The second one you have to do something about.
Post a Comment