Friday, November 22, 2013

“the equal treatment of gay couples is more important than .. free speech rights”

ACLU in the evaluation of Elane Photography LLC v. Vanessa Willock.
The ACLU? 
Really? Really?
Cato:
Elane Photography LLC v. Vanessa Willock is the case in which an Albuquerque, NM woman has (thus far successfully) sued husband-and-wife photographers under New Mexico’s “public accommodations” discrimination law for their reluctance to shoot photos of her commitment ceremony to a female partner. One of the most dismaying elements of the case is that the American Civil Liberties Union has taken the anti-liberty side. Adam Liptak in the NYT:
I asked Louise Melling, a lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, which has a distinguished history of championing free speech, how the group had evaluated the case.
Ms. Melling said the evaluation had required difficult choices. Photography is expression protected by the Constitution, she said, and Ms. [Elane] Huguenin acted from “heartfelt convictions.”
But the equal treatment of gay couples is more important than the free speech rights of commercial photographers, she said, explaining why the A.C.L.U. filed a brief in the New Mexico Supreme Court supporting the couple.
If this was so tough, then they should have stayed OUT OF IT. It is unimaginable that the ACLU would choose ANYTHING other than freedom of speech, just as they did in SKOKIE in 1968.
Or is the right of a gay couple to equal treatment more a right than that of holocaust survivors to freedom from intimidation?
How to choose? WHO CHOOSES?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

1 comment:

Charles Martel said...

Women have the right to abortion, but no doctor can be forced to perform one, even if the law allows it. Are they going to sue a doctor too?

This gay issue has lobotomized so many people it's beyond comprehension. Think of this. The US and the world are putting up with a lot to not offend the savages. Nevertheless, our State Department sends an openly gay man to country with a devout Muslim majority. They also sponsor gay pride celebrations and parades in embassies throughout countries also devoutly Muslims. These embassies employ a considerable number of local people. Aren't we offending them more than if we were to defend Christian minorities being savagely persecuted in those same countries where we are forcing gay pride down their throats?