Should Christian Photographers Be Sued for Refusing to Take Pictures of Gay Wedding?

I'm a part of the LGBT community and I still don't think they should be sued for what they believe. If they're being discriminatory and a complete disruption, then they should, but other than that, no :T
In this case, it is odd that they didn't figure out their clients were gay beforehand. . .Also; were they at the ceremony when they refused, or was the refusal done before that?

Everyone has the right to take a job or refuse to take it, for any reason.

They have that right to turn down a job.

there are lots of non believers that can hold a camera

why should they be sued for refusing to to take gay wedding picture is like me saying i am not taking a picture of you because your dress is red or green and i don't like them... so what if they are refusing just get get other photographers and that's all, just because they are christian "umm" well they are not true christian at all! because christian must love everyone and just anyone. they can't judge anyone if they do they are not true christian >:/

Christians do judge & Christians do not always love everyone. Christianity is not about perfectionism, if it were, there would be no need for God & forgiveness.

Is true what you are saying, but still God is the only one who is allow to judge.

Yes, that is absolutely right.

All around, just silly. The couple needs to find somebody who is comfortable with it. Not everybody is or will be okay with it. It's not some kind of secret that almost all Christians Don't except this, So why get upset when a Christian refuses to take pictures? The Christian is just extremely closed minded and this couple (nor any other couple) is not going to be the one too change everything.

it is there choice to take a pic or not after all they are the ones getting paid to do it if they don't do it don't pay them simple as that

Private businesses can refuse their service to anyone I think... I don't think it's right but such is the way of life.

If the photographers' disapproval of their clients' homosexuality was so strong, then they should have known that before they signed on in the first place. They're photographing their wedding, after all!

Either way, discrimination is discrimination. There's no other way to look at it, even if their discrimination is based on their faith. This will probably make the photographers look bad as a business. They're paying customers, so why not?

You see there is a very thin line when it comes to this situation, but if you hire and pay someone for a service they then refuse to do that is stealing. For example if you have somone do a service for you and then you refuse to pay them that is very illegal on its own. I was also on the fence when it came to their right to refuse serviced due to sexuality under the umbrella of religious freedom, but something caught my eye which was a comment by one of the many righties on this site "There are plenty of gay photographers, use one. And then it hit me what if you had a photographer refusing to take pictures of a marriage because it was a interracial couple and then the photographer in question turn around and say oh its against my religion, dose it make what they do any less discriminatory? No and thats why there are laws to protect people from discrimintation so they we insure all people in this nation are treated equally and fairly.

There are plenty of gay photographers. Use one.

I think we are getting to be a bit sue crazy...I had a gay person take my wedding photos..she didn't have a prob taking photos of us straight folks...course I am her Mommy!! I am beginning to think this world is going crazy..People are nuts! Always looking for something to complain about..sheesh find someone else and get the hell over it!!

They can pick their clients. Nobody has an absolute right to be photographed.

yes

They should pay heavily for it!

They should not have been hired in the first place if that was the case

that is F-N BS

why should they....

once again if it is their business they have a right to refuse anyone they choose. on a side note are there any gay photographers?

But I think the problem is that they agreed to it and then backed out because they were gay.

but i feel its still within there rights. now if it was last minute where the couple could not get another photographer. then i think the company should pay damages. maybe even be sued for breech of contract. but if the company backed out in plenty of time and they are suing them for saying no then i disagree with it.

It's there choice. We sue for everything now in this country now. Maybe they should have said there faces weren't photogenic.......

This is almost exactly like the wedding dress company in New Jersey what refused to make dresses for a pair of lesbians and another company in New Jersey that refused to make a different couple a cake.

In both those cases and this one the state has anti-discrimination laws that specificly protect homosexuals against discrimination based solely on their sexual orientation.

There were not private membership companies with specific requirements of membership like the Boy Scouts or almost all religious organizations.

Yes is was absolutely correct to sue the company for discrimination

I meant to click no. Let them lose the business.

In photography you can opt out of any job, because as a photographer you can't take your best pictures if you dislike the subject or the location.
Allowing someone to sue over discrimination seems like it could very easily get out of hand very quickly. Not to mention how difficult it would be to prove that just because they hate gays they chose not to take your job. We don't need any more frivolous lawsuits. They may have signed that they were going to photograph the event, in which case they can be sued for breach of contract.

As long as they were going to be paid as requested, then they had no legal bearing on which to refuse service.

sounds crazy BUT if the photographers hold themselves our to the public as available to do weddings, then they should follow through even if they don't like some of the choices of the soon-to-be-newly-weds ... i'm pretty sure that this is the law.

Christians do not have a carte blanche to violate anti-discrimination laws because of their "faith" any more than members of churches affiliated with the neo-Nazi Aryan Nation have a carte blanche to refuse to serve blacks. This issue is a no-brainer. You can believe any religious stuff you want, but the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment does not give you the right to disobey laws which you or your church declares to be inconsistent with your "faith".

We should have the freedom to associate or not as we please. It's it dumb? Yes. Is it wrong? Yes. Should they be sued? No.

This is bullying at it's worst. The photographer has the right to work for whom ever they want. I don't do my best work when I am bullied into taking a job I don't want. There are plenty of photographers who would have happily done the job. There was no need for this abuse of a photographers.

Then if that is how they feel, they should be forced to prominently display that they do not perform their services at same sex weddings. But waiting until the last minute to refuse is definitely due cause to sue!

You did not read the article or you would know that it was not last minute. Photographers are booked as much as a year ahead of time. the better solution for this would be like they did in Miami, years ago, advertise what they will do, such as, Se habla espanol, rather than what they won't do. All weddings welcome would be a lot better than being negative. People learn where to put their business and where not to. Bullying anyone into actions that are counter to their beliefs will bring nothing but anger, resentment and hostility on both sides. Learn to work it out people without the heavy hand of the court.

If a company wants to discriminate. they should be forced to pay the price for it by being ordered to prominently display their discriminatory practices. I for one, would not want to give my business to such people.

.... talk about losing profit... if I was a photographer for wedding I would take any type of wedding ceremony.... money in my pocket is good

If they agreed before hand to be the photographer.. then yes... Breach of contract.

IF they had not agreed to do so.. the couple should have found another photographer.

Part of a free society is being able to disagree with others lifestyle choices.