« 16 Chaplins | Main | Whatever Happened to Bubble Memory? »




The issue is freedom of conscience.

The idea of an inherent "right not to be discriminated against" is foolish. See...if you really believe in this right, you're going to have to apply it evenly to all people, all beliefs, all actions and all personal characteristics. Anything less is tacit admission that discrimination is really just fine...that the "right not to be discriminated against" is merely a tool to elevate your particular opinion to the status of law.


If he'd been sued for refusing to photograph a Christian event, I doubt you'd be saying "Freedom, Christianity: pick one". The problem here is ridiculously-invasive regulations, not homosexuality per se.

Operating a business is not an absolute right and should never be mistaken for one. As one of the conditions of being permitted to do business within a state you agree to abide by the regulations of that state, whatever they maybe. Sorry, but the religious belief of a business owner does not provide an excuse for violation of the law. Your either or proposition is an inaccurate one. This does not represent a choice between homosexuality and freedom but between discrimiation and the right not to be discriminated against. If you don't like the conditions of being in business, you don't have to operate that business...

The comments to this entry are closed.