NM Court: Christian Business Owners Have No Rights

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Photographers are at risk of being put out of business by every layman like me with a 5d or a Nikon D700/800.

Uh, no. Not even close. Maybe MWACs (mom's with a camera) would be threatened, but no real photographer who has established clients, an amazing portfolio, and spent years upon years refining their craft will ever be threatened by some layman that thinks just because they plop down some decent cash on a camera, they can take good pictures.

You haven't been talking to the wedding photographers. The quality of photography has actually declined in recent years as people have decided that crappy iphone cameras are good enough, at least for the majority of people who only post to Facebook. And the wedding profession has been overrun with less experienced people who are willing to do a half decent job for cheap.

The best photographers are better than ever. But the amateurs aren't stuck with crappy tools and results anymore.

[devildog 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Photographers are at risk of being put out of business by every layman like me with a 5d or a Nikon D700/800.

Uh, no. Not even close. Maybe MWACs (mom's with a camera) would be threatened, but no real photographer who has established clients, an amazing portfolio, and spent years upon years refining their craft will ever be threatened by some layman that thinks just because they plop down some decent cash on a camera, they can take good pictures.

You haven't been talking to the wedding photographers. The quality of photography has actually declined in recent years as people have decided that crappy iphone cameras are good enough, at least for the majority of people who only post to Facebook. And the wedding profession has been overrun with less experienced people who are willing to do a half decent job for cheap.

The best photographers are better than ever. But the amateurs aren't stuck with crappy tools and results anymore.

The people who decide they want an MWAC are not the clients good photographers are looking to get. Amateurs with good cameras are just as crappy. It would be like saying someone can be an awesome swooper with a few jumps but the latest rig. Or that you could write the next NYT best sellers with 0 practice / training / etc just because you bought a new laptop.

I promise, photographers that routinely get orders (not even for weddings) in the 5-10k range, just roll their eyes at mwacs. I'm not saying there isn't a super-cheap photographer market out there, but if that's the market you're angling for, you'll kill yourself in terms of work put out and money brought in. You'd do better working 7/11. However, if you're going to build a business and charge what you're worth in terms of skill and time spent honing the craft, the people that will pay for you are not the types to hire mwacs.

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I promise, photographers that routinely get orders (not even for weddings) in the 5-10k range, just roll their eyes at mwacs. I'm not saying there isn't a super-cheap photographer market out there, but if that's the market you're angling for, you'll kill yourself in terms of work put out and money brought in. You'd do better working 7/11. However, if you're going to build a business and charge what you're worth in terms of skill and time spent honing the craft, the people that will pay for you are not the types to hire mwacs.

the problem remains that when there's a large pool willing to work for cheap, it's hard to maintain prices. And the customers don't see the hours of work outside the shooting itself, even though that's a tiny fraction of their work day.

There was a recent thread in various forums about a Brit "agency" that was so horrible that they closed up shop, sold off their gear, and refunded what money they could because the results were just a travesty.

[devildog 0]

It would be like saying Ferrari or even BMW would be worried that someone found a way to make quick Yugo clones.

Some people shop at Wal-Mart for jewelry. Some people prefer Tiffany's. Some people want a Casio. Some people want a Rolex.

The high end photographers aren't looking to compete with the mwacs at all. MWACs can (and do) give away their services for free (or close to it) all the time, and it doesn't cut into their business because the clientelle they are after are worlds apart.

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

If the photographer believed the gay couple would disturb his customers, I believe he should have the right to protect his business.

..... but aren't the gay couple the customers?

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[Meso 38]

Quote

It would be like saying Ferrari or even BMW would be worried that someone found a way to make quick Yugo clones.

Some people shop at Wal-Mart for jewelry. Some people prefer Tiffany's. Some people want a Casio. Some people want a Rolex.

The high end photographers aren't looking to compete with the mwacs at all. MWACs can (and do) give away their services for free (or close to it) all the time, and it doesn't cut into their business because the clientelle they are after are worlds apart.

That is assuming the photographer is already an established one. Making a living as a photographer has become increasingly difficult, and more so for those who are looking to enter the business with talent and dedication.

I have seen first hand how people prefer to pay less and hire a completely incompetent photographer as opposed to paying more and hiring someone who is actually skilled in the profession. I know a few people who literally take photos of their lens caps and say "LOOK AT MY PHOTOGRAPHY" and are getting paid to shoot stuff, it's disgusting.

I am by no means a professional photographer, but I have spent 10 years practising, learning, reading, experimenting and there are people who are producing terrible images at standards far below mine being commissioned for stuff because they charge nothing.

This is something that has been felt by professional wild-life photographers even too, I have spoken to some of the best in South Africa and even they are having a rough time, even after being established, because publications are now expecting amateur photographers to be giving away their images for exposure or charging next to nothing.

I can assure you that in photography, the professionals are having to compete with novices, especially for commissioned work.

Because many places do not think to look at portfolios, they have someone say "I'm a photographer", and they accept that. Now that everyone with a DSLR calls themselves a photographer (A term I am reluctant to give myself despite the amount of time and effort I spend on taking photographs). Where as in the past the word photographer was generally kept to people who were actually photographers.

As I said, I have spoken to and read posts from some big names in S.A photography who have worked for National Geographic and are renowned for their work and they have also expressed their bitterness in the fact that magazines arent wanting to pay normal prices anymore because they simply say "Well **** offered us a pretty decent photograph of that for free, for exposure."

It's the same way that being an extremely skilled bottom end factory worker will not have any advantages to the millions of other people who are willing to do that job for next to nothing.

[Meso 38]

And as for the story of the actual original thread.

I am a bit on the fence about this, while I think it's disgusting to refuse service to someone because of their sexual orientation, and if it was in reverse and someone was refusing service to someone because they were Christian, they would also be making a huge deal about it and there would be an uproar.

With that said, part of me wants to say that as the one running the business, one should have the right to deny service to anyone and choose your customers based on whatever criteria you personally want, no matter how closed minded or bigoted.

But there is a problem there...

It would essentially become apartheid all over again. Business owners could easily say that they do not want to provide a service to blacks, making it a whites only business. Which is very similar to what these people are doing.

And all you need then is a hospital or school that is run by one of these people, and they could then refuse education or service to certain groups, based on their colour, sexual orientation or anything else they deem worthy.

I assure you that if a black owner of a large corporation started refusing to provide services to whites, there would be a full on race war ignited. Especially if it was in an area that people are using daily.

One has to use some common sense here, and realize that profiling is profiling, regardless of race or sexual orientation, and is that the kind of potential snow-ball effect one wants to support.

[Nigel 0]

This seems a pretty open and shut case of discrimination to me. As other posters have commented, if the couple were black and white, or black and black, such discrimination would be intolerable. Playing the religion card is silly. Otherwise we'd be tolerating female genital mutilation and forced marriage based on religious grounds.
I think this is 'Seculars - 1; Bigots - 0'... which makes a bit of a change.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

This seems a pretty open and shut case of discrimination to me. As other posters have commented, if the couple were black and white, or black and black, such discrimination would be intolerable. Playing the religion card is silly. Otherwise we'd be tolerating female genital mutilation and forced marriage based on religious grounds.
I think this is 'Seculars - 1; Bigots - 0'... which makes a bit of a change.

Unless this business takes fed dollars, this ruling will be, as have others, overturned

The SC has a history of supporting individuals rights to pick how private establishments operate

But, many would force their beliefs on business because they are very sure they know what is best

(NOTE) I am not saying I support this business decision. I am saying I do NOT support court intervention is cases like this

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

(NOTE) I am not saying I support this business decision. I am saying I do NOT support court intervention is cases like this

I agree. How someone chooses to run their business is their decision. What I would *hope* to happen is, that through negative publicity, the business would simply cease to gain clientele because of their practices and ultimately go out of business or fix their practices.

Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

(NOTE) I am not saying I support this business decision. I am saying I do NOT support court intervention is cases like this

I agree. How someone chooses to run their business is their decision. What I would *hope* to happen is, that through negative publicity, the business would simply cease to gain clientele because of their practices and ultimately go out of business or fix their practices.

Ian

+1 let the market dictate company policies. Companies eventually develop a reputation and people stop doing business with them.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

(NOTE) I am not saying I support this business decision. I am saying I do NOT support court intervention is cases like this

I agree. How someone chooses to run their business is their decision. What I would *hope* to happen is, that through negative publicity, the business would simply cease to gain clientele because of their practices and ultimately go out of business or fix their practices.

Ian

Agreed

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

Companies eventually develop a reputation and people stop doing business with them.

Yes, to a point. It's been my experience that once a company gets really big (and entrenched) - it's very difficult, or near impossible to get rid of them. Regardless of their practices and policies.

In the case of small or start up companies, their reputation seems to have a much larger effect.

Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Unless this business takes fed dollars, this ruling will be, as have others, overturned

The SC has a history of supporting individuals rights to pick how private establishments operate

it doesn't have a history of supporting discrimination versus blacks or women.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Unless this business takes fed dollars, this ruling will be, as have others, overturned

The SC has a history of supporting individuals rights to pick how private establishments operate

it doesn't have a history of supporting discrimination versus blacks or women.

Agreed

But it does not (or should not at least) be able to tell you who you have to serve or not

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Because many places do not think to look at portfolios, they have someone say "I'm a photographer", and they accept that. Now that everyone with a DSLR calls themselves a photographer

In many cases people do look at portfoliios - the web page of the photographer. But nothing prevents said photographer from harvesting samples from others, scrubbing any EXIF tags.

Devildog - you can keep your head in the sand, but it's not changing what's going on out there. Meso's examples on safari pics is well taken. The pros still have an advantage over the 3-5 day, 9-4pm safari tourist, but lucky timing is a big part of it.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Unless this business takes fed dollars, this ruling will be, as have others, overturned

The SC has a history of supporting individuals rights to pick how private establishments operate

it doesn't have a history of supporting discrimination versus blacks or women.

Agreed

But it does not (or should not at least) be able to tell you who you have to serve or not

there is conflict in these statements.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Unless this business takes fed dollars, this ruling will be, as have others, overturned

The SC has a history of supporting individuals rights to pick how private establishments operate

it doesn't have a history of supporting discrimination versus blacks or women.

Agreed

But it does not (or should not at least) be able to tell you who you have to serve or not

there is conflict in these statements.

I dont think so

The gov can do what it needs to when fed dollars are involved

But it should not be able to tell any person or business that is private, who it has to serve

No matter how big an asshat that person or business is

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Unless this business takes fed dollars, this ruling will be, as have others, overturned

The SC has a history of supporting individuals rights to pick how private establishments operate

it doesn't have a history of supporting discrimination versus blacks or women.

Agreed

But it does not (or should not at least) be able to tell you who you have to serve or not

there is conflict in these statements.

I dont think so

The gov can do what it needs to when fed dollars are involved

But it should not be able to tell any person or business that is private, who it has to serve

No matter how big an asshat that person or business is

Then to that, I will repeat what I said up-thread: I think the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s have resulted in the US being a more humane society than what existed before those laws existed. Those who feel otherwise I would invite to secede from the Union. (Pardon my Northern aggression.)

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Unless this business takes fed dollars, this ruling will be, as have others, overturned

The SC has a history of supporting individuals rights to pick how private establishments operate

it doesn't have a history of supporting discrimination versus blacks or women.

Agreed

But it does not (or should not at least) be able to tell you who you have to serve or not

there is conflict in these statements.

I dont think so

The gov can do what it needs to when fed dollars are involved

But it should not be able to tell any person or business that is private, who it has to serve

No matter how big an asshat that person or business is

Then to that, I will repeat what I said up-thread: I think the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s have resulted in the US being a more humane society than what existed before those laws existed. Those who feel otherwise I would invite to secede from the Union. (Pardon my Northern aggression.)

Again

I am not defending them

I am however defending all our rights to keep the gov from butting in where it is not needed or intended to be

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

I am not defending them

I am however defending all our rights to keep the gov from butting in where it is not needed or intended to be

The debate has always been mostly over where it is or is not needed. With respect to race, I agree with the majority of those in Congress in 1964 that it was, and is, needed. With respect to discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation, I agree with the majority of the New Mexico legislature that it is needed.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

I am not defending them

I am however defending all our rights to keep the gov from butting in where it is not needed or intended to be

The debate has always been mostly over where it is or is not needed. With respect to race, I agree with the majority of those in Congress in 1964 that it was, and is, needed. With respect to discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation, I agree with the majority of the New Mexico legislature that it is needed.

Then where does it end?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I am not defending them

I am however defending all our rights to keep the gov from butting in where it is not needed or intended to be

The debate has always been mostly over where it is or is not needed. With respect to race, I agree with the majority of those in Congress in 1964 that it was, and is, needed. With respect to discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation, I agree with the majority of the New Mexico legislature that it is needed.

Then where does it end?

Each generation has to define that in its own time.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I am not defending them

I am however defending all our rights to keep the gov from butting in where it is not needed or intended to be

The debate has always been mostly over where it is or is not needed. With respect to race, I agree with the majority of those in Congress in 1964 that it was, and is, needed. With respect to discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation, I agree with the majority of the New Mexico legislature that it is needed.

Then where does it end?

Each generation has to define that in its own time.

Agreed

We are dong this now

And I will respectfully disagree with you

i do not need you or a government hack telling me who to serve in my own business, unless I take fed dollars

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

i do not need you or a government hack telling me who to serve in my own business, unless I take fed dollars

if your business can't survive without fed dollars, then it's a parasite - so we can simplify this even further

frankly, the photographers are idiots to decline any business in this economy - there's business that should be the option to decline at the business discretion (porn, mutliation, 'bad' art, etc etc etc), but an innocent partnership ceremony seems pretty lame to decline the $$ for

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants