In "When Freedoms Collide" George writes about Elane Photography, in specific the horrid files of discrimination and law suits thrown at the owners: Elane Huguenin and her husband. It all began when Elane was contacted by a women named Vanessa Willock who asked to hire Elane Photography for her same gender commitment ceremony. Elane simply rejected because of religious reasons. After Willock got a response from Elane stating she does not photograph same sex marriage, her partner decided to also email Elane about a marriage she was having. Her partner did not disclose that it was same sex marriage and therefor Elane agreed to photograph. Willock and her partner filed discrimination towards Elane Photography and George expresses in his writing
…show more content…
According to the author he feels religion is a perfect reason for Elane 's refusal to take the photographs. The NMHRC claimed against the company and Elane Photography was forced to pay $6,600 for attorney fees. Eugene Voloch of the UCLA school of law sides with Huguenin stating that she should not be coerced into doing something that she is protected by religion. Voloch states how can one be forced to express themselves in art when the subject is not to their liking. "Would a photographer, even a Jewish photographer, be compelled to record a Nazi Party ceremony?" the statement says it all. The authors last words explained how he felt as though some of the participants of hay rights should be controlled a little. Literally stating that Willock and her partner were taking advantage of a person with a different view of the …show more content…
It is unfair for that not only does Elane and her husband suffer, but their company also. Remind you that 's her reputation and what puts the food on the table. The way George phrases his emotion towards Willock and her partner he enforces anger that they try to blame it on discrimination rather than respecting their religion. Remember back to when Willock partner mentioned she was having a marriage not commitment ceremony for same gender. Obviously Elane states for religious reasons and because of that no one can argue. This statement is written in the constitution and that is the law. Now looking at both perspectives: Willock and her partner and Elane and her husband. We see Elanes point of view of refusing to do something that is against her religion. Now I 'm no lawyer, but I 'm pretty sure we have freedom of religion and speech. Understandable how Willock and her partner are upset as in their point of view they feel disrespected. However Elane should not be having this hauled over head for the rest of her life. She said no there are probably thousands of photographers around the world why try to ruin someone life. People have the right to express their religion it should not be assaulted. This situation occurred in 2006 it is 2016 now this is after the Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage is a nationwide right. So because of this these issues are still controversial to
According to the author he feels religion is a perfect reason for Elane 's refusal to take the photographs. The NMHRC claimed against the company and Elane Photography was forced to pay $6,600 for attorney fees. Eugene Voloch of the UCLA school of law sides with Huguenin stating that she should not be coerced into doing something that she is protected by religion. Voloch states how can one be forced to express themselves in art when the subject is not to their liking. "Would a photographer, even a Jewish photographer, be compelled to record a Nazi Party ceremony?" the statement says it all. The authors last words explained how he felt as though some of the participants of hay rights should be controlled a little. Literally stating that Willock and her partner were taking advantage of a person with a different view of the …show more content…
It is unfair for that not only does Elane and her husband suffer, but their company also. Remind you that 's her reputation and what puts the food on the table. The way George phrases his emotion towards Willock and her partner he enforces anger that they try to blame it on discrimination rather than respecting their religion. Remember back to when Willock partner mentioned she was having a marriage not commitment ceremony for same gender. Obviously Elane states for religious reasons and because of that no one can argue. This statement is written in the constitution and that is the law. Now looking at both perspectives: Willock and her partner and Elane and her husband. We see Elanes point of view of refusing to do something that is against her religion. Now I 'm no lawyer, but I 'm pretty sure we have freedom of religion and speech. Understandable how Willock and her partner are upset as in their point of view they feel disrespected. However Elane should not be having this hauled over head for the rest of her life. She said no there are probably thousands of photographers around the world why try to ruin someone life. People have the right to express their religion it should not be assaulted. This situation occurred in 2006 it is 2016 now this is after the Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage is a nationwide right. So because of this these issues are still controversial to