The US Department of Justice this week filed a ‘statement of interest’, supporting a photographer in Kentucky who doesn’t want to shoot same-sex weddings.
Under Louisville legislation, local businesses are not allowed to turn away customers because of their sexual orientation. Photographer Chelsey Nelson is challenging this 20-year-old ‘Fairness Ordinance’, saying she doesn’t want to appear to support same-sex marriages.
She filed legal action last November claiming the legislation violates her First Amendment rights to free speech and free exercise of religion.
Related: Stephen Colbert rips into “antigay baker” who won’t use “LGBTQ” lettering on his cakes
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Nelson, according to her legal paperwork, believes “God created marriage to be an exclusive covenant between one man and one woman.” This belief shapes “every aspect of her life,” including “her business, her art, and her creativity.”
Nelson and her lawyers want the courts to stop the Louisville Fairness Ordinance from being enforced. She’s being backed by the Alliance Defending Freedom – a Christian organization that has taken up similar cases of businesses not wanting to service same-sex marriages. The organization has been designated a ‘hate group’ by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Nelson says she would photograph a wedding between a “homosexual man and a woman”, but not between two people of the same sex.
The DOJ’s ‘Statement of Interest’ was filed in federal court in Kentucky. A press release sent out by the DOJ said Nelson “is likely to succeed on her claim.”
It quotes Eric Dreiband, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division: “The First Amendment forbids the government from forcing someone to speak in a manner that violates individual conscience. The U.S. Department of Justice will continue to protect the right of all persons to exercise their constitutional right to speech and expression.”
Related: This photographer shot an ad of a same-sex couple. Then the scary voicemails started…
The brief notes that “[w]eddings are sacred rites in the religious realm and profoundly symbolic ceremonies in the secular one” and therefore are “expressive activities” under the Supreme Court’s Free Speech cases.
The press statement says, “Forcing a photographer, against her conscience, to express her support for a wedding that her faith opposes violates the Constitution.”
The statement ends by noting that in July 2018, the Department of Justice set up its Religious Liberty Task Force specifically to look at religious liberty litigation and policy.
Cam
To all the trolls that keep trying to say Obama was bad for LGBTQ people and Trump is great…
Obamas DOJ refused to defend laws discriminating against us. Trump’s DOJ is attacking the laws that protect us and outlaw discrimination.
Republicans are bigots.
Charlie in Charge
Indeed. There can be no confusion about their agenda. Voting for Republicans harms LGBT people.
Den
Yup. There is no way to support the notion that Trump is pro LGBT. One need only look at his judicial appointments; from the SCOTUS on down through the entire federal court system.
When he has appointed LGBT people to any position is is entirely because they donated lots of money to him or because their political positions are overwhelmingly regressive.
DuMaurier
I know you were here during the ’16 campaign, when some Queerty posters were pushing Trump because he has gay friends, said some nice things, etc; but we can’t trust Hillary because she took a while to endorse marriage equality! At the same time Trump was releasing lists of his potential judge appointments, and every one the kind who’d support the anti-gay photographers.
That’s where it matters most. Hillary’s judges would’ve been different on LGBTQ rights, abortion, etc–whatever else anyone thought of her (or thinks of the current Democratic candidates)
djhavyk
Yeah, but honestly guys, do you really WANT a photographer doing your wedding photos who doesn’t want to be there? I’m a gay man who’s about to get married in June AND a professional photographer, so I can definitely see both sides of this issue. If you try to force a photographer to work for you who doesn’t really want to, you’re not going to get his/her best work, period.
But I wouldn’t worry about it too much because the laws of supply and demand will balance everything out. If a market develops out there for gay-friendly wedding photographers because of jackasses like this person, I guarantee there will be photographers jumping to fill that need. Give your money to the people who WANT your business, stop trying to force the money into people’s hands who don’t want it.
Plus, we should be focusing on changing minds and hearts out there, not forcing people to do things they don’t want to do. The real problem here is that this photographer thinks it’s okay to believe the way she/he does. That’s the real problem.
Kangol2
So you’re saying legalized discrimination against certain groups is OK? Really?
Me2
This real issue is precedence. We can’t start allowing businesses to blatantly discriminate, at will, because where would it stop? Furthermore, snapping pictures isn’t the equivalent of endorsing or giving your blessing. It’s a business transaction.
Roy Moss
Eric Dreiband is pretty well know for his irrational hatred of the GLBT community so this is par for the course. There really aren’t any honorable, decent people left in the DOJ, they are all there to push their hate and greed driven agenda.
JessPH
Would Trump’s DOJ also defend those who have religious beliefs against interracial marriages?
TomG
Of course not.
GayEGO
How stupid these people are, God did not create marriage, people did.
Me2
Exactly!!
CityguyUSA
Why do people want someone that has no interest in filming their short-lived event that doesn’t want to do it? Are they looking for a crap job? I don’t get this. Go find someone that wants to do it and get a good job.
Why force your income on someone that has no interest? They’ll figure out when enough of us are moving in that direction that they aren’t making any money. And then when they’re begging for gay weddings everyone can say I don’t think we’re interested in someone that didn’t want to serve our community.
Hdtex
Are you HIGH?
abscomp
Hmmm. Photographing a wedding is a personal service. I think it is wrong to force someone to perform a personal service if they don’t want to, regardless of the reason. Individual liberty must always be carefully balanced against the need to protect certain groups against unfair treatment.
Hdtex
BULLSHIT
TomG
Sorry, but if a business does business with the general public they HAVE TO do business with EVERYONE, and not exclude anyone. Besides, Gay marraige is NOW LEGAL and if this photographer has a problem with that, than change ytour profession !
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
FCUK OFF TROLL
TomG
Sorry, but if a business does business with the general public they HAVE TO do business with EVERYONE, and not exclude anyone. Besides, Gay marraige is NOW LEGAL and if this photographer has a problem with that, than change ytour profession !