RSS Feed MenuA report in Wednesday’s Washington Post discusses the expected boon in wedding-related work now that the District of Columbia is recognizing same-sex marriages.
Now, that’s interesting. Because a few of my friends who are involved in that industry (flowers, photography and such), and don’t believe in gay marriage will now have to have lawyers on retainer just in case a gay couple sues them for discrimination.
Also, it seems that you have to disclose that you don’t do gay weddings on the major marketing websites, which means that rich liberal straight couples can discriminate against you for your religious beliefs by only throwing their business to the “affirming.”
So, yes, it’s not a good time for the wedding business… if you are the wrong religion. You’d think they would have mentioned that part of the equation too.
sinz54 // Mar 10, 2010 at 5:27 pm
I don’t see the connection between the two issues.
Even before same-sex marriage was legal, any devoutly Catholic businessmen were faced with whether they could discriminate against same-sex couples. For example, what if a Catholic motel owner refused to allow a gay couple a room for the night?
So I assume that whatever the courts have ruled on that before, will apply to wedding photographers now.
mlloyd // Mar 10, 2010 at 5:44 pm
What is your angle, BoolaBoola?
BoolaBoola // Mar 10, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Driving homophobes out of business is GOOD! They don’t deserve the right to earn a living. Let them give up their homophobia, or else let them support their families by begging.
PracticalGirl // Mar 10, 2010 at 8:01 pm
A wedding planner wants to be able to discriminate against a small sector of clients because they find their gayness unacceptable, yet gets upset at the idea that he/she may be judged (and not hired) by another couple who finds the wedding planner’s prejudices unacceptable. What’s wrong with this picture?
yoyo // Mar 10, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Poor wittle bigots, why would you want to be in an industry about love and people if you dont like many people and cant perceive love when it hits you in the face? It’s like wanting protection to be a postman who wont deliver to apartments. Or to take the equally evil right wing fundy example- a chemist who wont provide contraception.
Boo hoo my bigotry may affect may ability to do my job and EVEN WORSE make a living.
Independent // Mar 10, 2010 at 10:34 pm
Well, I guess at FF that’s progress: we have a yoyo and a boolaboola playing the gay bigot cards against, imagine this, alleged “bigots” who don’t support their world view. I guess bigot is in the eye of the beholder?
As a gay who lived through more than a hundred marriages, commitment ceremonies (which I love when the lesbian couples costume up as male groom and female bride… so insecure they need to embrace the illusion denied them) and other gay and civil hybrids, I can tell you that we never heard a single story of any bigotry by anyone engaged in commerce. The general attitude we’ve found is that if your paying with money, you’re good; paying with sheep favors, leave ‘em on the other side of the fence.
The only time we’ve heard about all these “crimes against gay marriage” is from the emotionally wrecked gay couple that can’t seem to generate any press –even if it is just a wedding announcement on page 34 of section D. It’s like this is their moment to be the world’s victim and damn it, somebody’s going to comply!!
yoyo and boolaboola represent a fiction that is largely non-extant in the gay community I habit. But that’s never stopped the victimization industry of the Left, has it? Heck, the Democrats have made it into an industry of feigned outrage.
kevin47 // Mar 10, 2010 at 11:01 pm
This is the problem. The gay power industry consists of thousands of lobbyists, lawyers and activists. If legal gay marriage becomes the norm, these people aren’t going to go away. They aren’t going to quit their jobs, or turn their attention to farm subsidies.
They will absolutely come after churches, florists, photographers and anyone else who “discriminates”. One prominent gay power lawyer conceded as much when he said that, in a balance between sexual liberty and religious freedom, he saw no case for the latter.
Fortunately, they do a pretty good job of tipping their hand, driving a wedge between themselves and those who might be inclined to support gay marriage. If DC gay marriage becomes a PR battle between angry gays and their lawyers (see BoolaBoola above) and small business florists, the nation will be inclined to scrap the experiment once and for all.
As for the major marketing sites, I suspect any policy outing “the bigots” is not going to last. Traditionalists can just as easily refuse to do business with those companies that do work with gay couples, the latter having been “outed” de facto.
Kevin B // Mar 11, 2010 at 5:52 am
So there will be a small minority of gay couples who choose to fight the florist who doesn’t want their business. Most will simply go to the one who courts their business, or the one their friends recommend. Why ruin a joyous occasion over the hostile stranger?
The balance between sexual liberty and religious liberty will shift (as it has been shifting all along), with compromises that will seem obvious in hindsight.
And bloggers and blog commenters will analyze each anecdotal incident with real or feigned outrage, making dire claims without irony, and putting irony quotes around key words in the dire claims made by the other side.
kevin47 // Mar 11, 2010 at 11:41 am
“So there will be a small minority of gay couples who choose to fight the florist who doesn’t want their business.”
Thereby suing them into oblivion.
“Most will simply go to the one who courts their business, or the one their friends recommend. Why ruin a joyous occasion over the hostile stranger?”
Most will, but it is the minority that will make the news.
“The balance between sexual liberty and religious liberty will shift (as it has been shifting all along), with compromises that will seem obvious in hindsight.”
I’m not so sure about this. I do agree that the gay rights movement is predicated on the assumption that religious liberty will deteriorate. But that’s going to be a bigger problem than you imagine. Most people see sexual liberty and religious liberty as unrelated issues. Once those issue come in conflict, you’re going to see a firestorm, and rightly so.
“And bloggers and blog commenters will analyze each anecdotal incident with real or feigned outrage, making dire claims without irony, and putting irony quotes around key words in the dire claims made by the other side.”
Can I assume, then, that you generally support the gay power activists? Generally, this “oh well, it’s inevitable” attitude emanates from that side. If so, I would give that a rethink. Framing gay power as an inevitable plot point in the civil rights trajectory has been a profoundly ineffective tactic.
Kevin B // Mar 11, 2010 at 6:57 pm
“Most will, but it is the minority that will make the news.”
Yes. Just as the minority of gun owners who go on shooting rampages are the ones who make the news. I don’t base my opinion of either gun control or gay marriage on the behavior of the small minority.
“Framing gay power as an inevitable plot point in the civil rights trajectory has been a profoundly ineffective tactic.”
I wouldn’t trust it as a tactic. But is is still my expectation, based on the changes I’ve witnessed over the past thirty years.
MD_LA // Mar 13, 2010 at 7:57 am
Seriously?!
What is the point of this blog post, anyway?
It’s ALREADY ILLEGAL for ANY business owner (whether religious affiliation or not) to DISCRIMINATE against paying customers. If you offer a service to the general public, you must offer that service to ALL of the general public… no matter what your personal beliefs.
I am a Christian business owner in California. I don’t care for Baptists or Jews. They do NOT have the same religious beliefs as me. I don’t really care for Filipinos… they are very shady to do business with… but can I NOT refuse my PUBLICLY OFFERED services to them! It is against the law!!! So why should this issue be any different?
There is protection of religious belief in this country… it’s one of the “good” things about “the seperation of church and state” doctrine. If you conduct business SOLEY within your church and your fellow congregants… then you have the right to exclude others you deem unfit and you are exempt from taxes.
HOWEVER, if you choose to offer services to the GENERAL PUBLIC, you must abide by ALL anti-discrimination laws. This was the case even before Gay marriage. Personally, I’d be happy to take their money… it’s not gonna change my beliefs. And if they discover my beliefs, they know I treated them fairly…. and they STILL have the right to continue conducting business w/ me… or take their business elsewhere.
Personally, I NEVER discuss religion or politics with my general customers. It’s just bad business.