Matt Lewis penned a thoughtful post on The Week (Why photographers shouldn’t have to work at same-sex weddings). He begins:
Photographers are artists. They shouldn’t be in the same category as bakers and bartenders.
As a professional graphic designer and trained (classical) musician, I find this distinction questionable in the extreme.
I also find it irrelevant, but some very intelligent friends on the Right (including Matt) don’t:
Some background from the Los Angeles Times:
UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh and the Cato Institute’s Ilya Shapiro had filed a separate brief urging the court to hear the case. They said the 1st Amendment should protect writers, singers, actors, or artists whose work involves expression. But they said this protection was limited in scope and should not extend to “denials of service by caterers, hotels, limousine service operators, and the like.”
Ruling against the photographer, the New Mexico Supreme Court refused “to draw the line between ‘creative’ or ‘expressive’ professionals and all others.” For example, its judges said, a “flower shop is not intuitively ‘expressive’, but florists use artistic skills and training to design and construct floral displays.” And the same is true of bakers and wedding cakes, they said. [Los Angeles Times]
In this case, “drawing the line” (in my opinion) would be like drawing a line in the sand on the ocean floor.
Their artistry is irrelevant. That they’re being conscripted into participating in something against their religion is all that matters to me.
Why should government be allowed to force any individual to bless someone else’s private, intimate ceremonies?
Aside from the mystery why anyone engaging in those ceremonies would want a “blessing” from a frightened disapprover.
Unless they just want to humiliate them into submission to the hive’s need for validation?