New Mexico Supreme Court: Christian Photographer Must Serve Homosexual Marriage Counterfeiters

Phil Jensen


photographyWASHINGTON, D.C.- Today, the New Mexico Supreme Court in Elane Photography v. Willock, ruled against a Christian photographer who, citing her deeply held religious beliefs, declined to work a same-sex commitment ceremony.  New Mexico law does not recognize gay marriage or gay civil unions. A recent Rasmussen survey found that 85 percent of Americans support the right of a photographer to refuse participation in a same-sex “wedding.”

Ken Klukowski, Family Research Council’s Director for the Center for Religious Liberty released the following statement:



“The New Mexico Supreme Court’s decision is profoundly disturbing. That court explicitly declares that a person’s sincerely-held religious beliefs–in this case, traditional and orthodox Christian beliefs–do not permit them to run their privately-owned business in accordance with their religious beliefs. This decision would stun the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, is a gross violation of the First Amendment, and should now be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court to reaffirm the basic principle that the fundamental rights of free speech and the free exercise of religion do not stop at the exit door of your local church, and instead extend to every area of a religious person’s life.

“This decision may bring to Americans’ attention the serious threat to religious liberty posed by overbearing government agencies when it comes to redefining marriage. Rather than live-and-let-live, this is forcing religious Americans to violate the basic teachings of their faith, or lose their jobs,” concluded Klukowski.

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Rick Kriebel 2016


Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Similar Posts:

Newswire articles originate from a variety of sources including wire services, press releases and more. Newswire pieces are written by a representative of the person or organization that is the subject or source of the article and are presented as informational statements about the subject discussed.
View all articles by Newswire
Print Friendly
  • The list is long, and getting longer all the time, of people and businesses across the world and even here in the United States who are being forced-in violation of free market principles as well as Constitutional guarantees of religious liberty-to pay homage to the homosexual agenda.

    Wake up, America. Two diametrically opposed value systems cannot peacefully coexist with one another. One will dominate while the other is subjugated. Do we really want to abandon the value system that produced the greatest nation in history, in favor of one that produces oppression and suffering everywhere it has ever been tried?

  • DCM7

    As is usually the case, the point for the “gay couple” was not getting a photographer who would participate in their sham, but punishing one who wouldn’t.
    Bring up a case like this to “gay” apologists as an example of how “gay rights” cause other rights to be trampled, and their response will be something like “having religious beliefs doesn’t put you above the law.”
    But laws can be, and often are, unjust. It’s telling that those whose position conflicts with hard reality so often work to change laws so they can hide behind them.

  • thisoldspouse

    The rot is spreading quickly now. Considering Kennedy’s mindless decision in Windsor, I seriously see the USSC siding with the NM Court.

  • retiredday

    Fewer and fewer people (including lawmakers, lawyers and judges) seem to understand the constitution, or if they understand it, they simply disregard it. Copy Publius Huldah’s single-page chart of exactly what the constitution means at
    and spread it around.