Comments on: “Choosing What to Photograph Is a Form of Speech” http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/ Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Tue, 31 Mar 2015 22:32:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1 By: Jack Wilson http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273984 Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:34:07 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273984 I have no problem with discriminating by race, gender, religion, height, general appearance, political affiliation, national origin, body mass or amount of hair.

Prior to the Great Society, most of that type of discrimination was legal, but was generally not an issue. In fact discrimination was only a major problem where it was required by law.

]]>
By: Ron Miller http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273973 Fri, 21 Mar 2014 13:20:36 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273973 Jack, I support taxation but I am not a socialist. I support people but I don’t believe we should have a Gestapo. support clean air yet I still think we should travel by automobile.

This was said obviously in the context of businesses that are open to the general public.

Actually, Jack, my first thought was to take you out on a ledge to show that under your theory, you could discriminate by race. Then I looked back at these comments. You are already on that ledge.

This does not automatically make you wrong but I think it is important to ask: is there a single public figure in America who shares this view? Take me to the reddest state in America. Is their a single congressman who supports this? I don’t know. But I doubt it.

]]>
By: Jack Wilson http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273811 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 20:17:19 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273811 Ron Miller: You claim to ‘ strongly believe that people should not discriminated based on sexual orientation and we should have laws to reflect this decency.’

Would you require people who subscribe to dating services to not discriminate based on sexual orientation?

]]>
By: DEM http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273783 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 16:57:19 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273783 “Please cite to empirical evidence that the social safety net has had a net negative aggragate affect on the country.”

If you were really interested in such research, you’d use Google to find it, just like I would. But I can’t take your message board demand for academic research seriously when your posts in this very thread are absolutely full of sweeping assertions backed by nothing other than your own beliefs. That was the point of my first response to you, a point I fear you’ve missed. Why am I to be held to a standard to which you apparently don’t hold yourself?

“Why is my comparison to crimes bizarre and wholly unconvincing? Laws against discrimination and against crimes all represent our moral framework as a society.”

Because the distinctions betwen murder and refusing to photograph a wedding on religious grounds are so vast as to render your comparison meaningless at best, intentionally misleading at worst. When we outlaw murder, we don’t confront a conflict between bona fide, legally protected religious beliefs and civil rights granted by law. When we force a religious photographer to photograph a gay wedding, we do.

]]>
By: gitarcarver http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273768 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:27:46 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273768 Allan,

Please cite to empirical evidence that the social safety net has had a net negative aggragate affect on the country.

The fact that we now have more people being supported by the government’s reach into people’s pockets than not? Do you think that is a good idea? The so called “war on poverty” has resulted in no major changes and in fact a case can be made for the idea that the situation is worse because people use the “safety net” not as a net to catch them from falling, but as a foundation.

Others,

But as to the original questions on so called “discrimination,” there is a difference in the artistic work of a wedding cake maker or photographer and a burger at a lunch counter.

The burger is the same no matter who buys it. Yet the baker and the photographer are chosen for their artistic works. It is not how the cake tastes, but how beautiful it looks. Anyone can take a picture with a cell phone, but a true artist can capture the beauty of a wedding.

If art is a form of speech, then the courts have no business or right to compel speech that is against their wishes.

Finally, we talk all the time about not discriminating against the beliefs of a person when they are a customer. We outlaw hiring or not hiring on the basis of beliefs. We make companies at the point of the government sword “accommodate” the religious beliefs of employees once hired.

Yet there is no accommodation or place for the beliefs of the owner of a business? The government says that owner must accommodate everyone but yet his rights and beliefs can be trampled upon?

If we are talking about equality, where is the equality in that?

]]>
By: Ron Miller http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273764 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:00:07 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273764 This whole let’s make race discrimination legal again will not gain any currency anywhere except in these comments. I’m grateful for this.

“Here’s a question for the ‘wedding cakes are a constitutional right’ crowd….”

I strongly believe that people should not discriminated based on sexual orientation and we should have laws to reflect this decency. But I appreciate that reasonable people disagree with me. But can at least have an honest discussion about it instead of making up straw men who argue that there is a cake is a constitutional right? Because it is a dishonest way to attack the argument.

]]>
By: Jack Wilson http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273736 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:42:24 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273736 Didn’t this whole notion of outlawing discrimination by businesses start as a response to the bizarre creation known as Jim Crow laws? These were laws that required businesses to discriminate. The existence of these laws indicates that businesses weren’t discriminating enough. In other words businesses will tend to behave rationally rather than in a discriminating manner. I say we let them return to rational behavior and stop interfering in the business/consumer relationship.

]]>
By: Malcolm Smith http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273685 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 04:55:14 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273685 To reply to Allan: what happens if every business in town discriminates and are not intimidated by social pressure? What happens if no restaurant will serve Afro-Americans and there are only two Afro-Americans in town?
If I ever found myself in that situation, I would consider it time to pack my bags. Whether it was my fault or not, I would obviously be unpopular in that town, and the residents would find plenty of other legal ways to shun me and make my stay unpleasant. It would also mean that the anti-discrimination laws you recommend had been made against popular opinion. That is the catch-22 of such legislation: it is either unnecessary or undemocratic.
But, in any case, you are tilting at windmills. In the real world how likely such a thing would be in this day and age?

]]>
By: Bumper http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273661 Thu, 20 Mar 2014 02:13:20 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273661 Allan,

We, as a society, don’t allow theft. Get stopped by the police driving down the road with more cash than they think you should possess.

We don’t allow assault. Jaywalk in Austin, TX and see what happens.

We don’t allow murder. I’m sure that dead grandma in Atlanta from a botched drug raid, or the kid gunned down last week while answering the door while holding a WII controller might just disagree.

We don’t allow libel. Surely someone as liberal as you must watch MSNBC or read the Old Gray Lady. Oh, if a liberal says it it must be true, but a scum sucking conservative says it the judicial guillotine.

If we choose, why can’t we also forbid discrimination? Based on your previous assertions I’m amazed we gotten as far as fast as we have.

Note: I am not picking of peace officers, I have a number of dear friends who are policemen, we often pontificate over adult beverages where this train got off the track. Often it comes back to government mandates that resulted in bad hires, poor training, low pay and over militarization. Go figure. I almost forgot to mention liberal “Let ‘em Go” judges.

]]>
By: Allan http://overlawyered.com/2014/03/choosing-photograph-form-speech/comment-page-1/#comment-273628 Wed, 19 Mar 2014 22:06:22 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/?p=44632#comment-273628 Jack,

Excellent question. I don’t know. But if the lower price was because the patron was white or heterosexual, I think there might be a problem. Proving the motive, however, is another thing altogether.

Dem,

Why is my comparison to crimes bizarre and wholly unconvincing? Laws against discrimination and against crimes all represent our moral framework as a society.

Please cite to empirical evidence that the social safety net has had a net negative aggragate affect on the country.

The poor were starving in the 1930s. Not so much now, as they have food stamps and other safety net programs. The rich were never starving.

I do not think this is a Rosa Parks redux. I just was wondering the methodology we can use to make rules that prohibit discrimination based on race in restaurants but allow discrimination based on homosexuality for wedding products such as cakes and photographs. For my question, we will assume that the government wants to prohibit both types of discrimination. (May I also assume that we agree that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and race is economically irrational?)

]]>