The New Mexico Supreme Court struck a blow to personal and religious freedom in the name of tolerance and the idea that “compromise is the price of citizenship”.
A photography shop refused to provide services to photograph a commitment ceremony for a same-sex couple. Their refusal was based on their personal religious convictions regarding marriage.
Rather than go find another photographer, the couple decided to file a discrimination claim. The claim made its way up to the New Mexico Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the same-sex couple and against the photographers.
The Court in essence has ruled that Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Jews, and others must surrender the faithful practice of their religion in the name of citizenship.
Justice Richard Bosson wrote in his concurring opinion:
At its heart, this case teaches that at some point in our lives all of us must compromise, if only a little, to accommodate the contrasting values of others…. That compromise is part of the glue that holds us together as a nation, the tolerance that lubricates the varied moving parts of us as a people…. In short, I would say to the Huguenins [Photography shop owners], with the utmost respect: it is the price of citizenship.
But as Erick Erickson of Red State points out:
…the tolerance is one way. In the name of tolerance, Mrs. Huguenin can be compelled by state power on pain of punishment to provide her services to Ms. Willock [couple member] against Mrs. Huguenin’s several thousand-year old orthodox religious beliefs, but Ms. Willock is under no obligation to simply tolerate those who disagree with her and find someone who is happy to provide the service.
Now let’s look at the unintended consequences (or perhaps not so unintended) that are sure to come if this ruling is not struck down by the SCOTUS which most assuredly will be asked to hear this case. Imagine now, other couples or any one that is LGBT and equally as vindictive as this one in New Mexico, who decides to make it a point to seek out Christian establishments which may feel equally strong about their religious convictions and when services are refused, WHAM the precedent is in place to sue them into submission or out of business.
85% of the American public, men, women, black, white, hispanic, conservatives, moderates, and even liberals agree that Christians should not be forced to provide goods and services to couples seeking gay marriages. This isn’t a divided topic.
One sided tolerance isn’t tolerance at all.
It’s prejudice.
