New Mexico Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a photographer who would not accept an assignment to photograph a gay commitment ceremony was guilty of discrimination based on sexual orientation.
The court's position
The gay spokesperson:“The Huguenins today can no more turn away customers on the basis of their sexual orientation – photographing a same-sex marriage ceremony – than they could refuse to photograph African-Americans or Muslims,” Justice Richard Bosson wrote in the court’s unanimous decision.
“But there is a price, one that we all have to pay somewhere in our civic life,” the justice wrote. “The Huguenins have to channel their conduct, not their beliefs, so as to leave space for other Americans who believe something different. 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.”
While my position on gay "marriage" is one that favors civil unions with the same rights as herterosexuals, I'm not sure I agree with compelling a someone to participate in someone else's religious ceremony which stands for values a person cannot condone.“It’s about discrimination,” she said. “It’s not religious rights versus gay rights. We have a law on the books that makes it illegal to discriminate against LGBT persons. It makes it illegal for business to do that and this business broke the law by discriminating against this couple.”
It seems different to me to treat LGBTs equally in all legal and social respects v. asking someone to participate in their religious beliefs. Participating voluntarily would be different as well v. compulsion by threat of legal action, and the articles cites "thousands of dollars in fines."
I'm just not sure about this.