Backlash !! Arizona rules against the “utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist” Gaystapo.


“The  christian photographers  are  now  compelled by law

to compromise the very religious beliefs

that inspire their lives.”

…. Justice Richard  Bosson …..



The  USA  which used to be  “the land  of  the free  and  the home  of  the brave”  has  apparently become the  land  of  the  ” utterly  fascist and  utterly Stalinist”   Gaystapo where  there  is  no  freedom  of  conscience .

The  article below  is sobering.

A  small  business  enterprise  whose  owners were  christian and  therefore  do  not  accept  homosexual  behaviour  were  asked  to take  photographs at  a  same – sex wedding.  They refused  to  do so as it was  against  their  conscience.  The couple  took  the business  before  the court  and  won.

Testifyingtotruth  has  been warning  about  the “utterly fascist. utterly Stalinist”  tendencies  of  the Gaystapo  which this case  clearly demonstrates.  The  Gaystapo  also has  neocolonialist  and  imperialist  tendencies.

Fortunately not all Americans  are  in support  of  the fascism  which  is  becoming  a  feature  of  American life  under  the influence  of  the Gaystapo so  the state  of  Arizona  has  produced  legislation to ensure  freedom  of  conscience.    

For the record, Testifyingtotruth  does  not  accept  that a service  provider  should  be  free  to deny  services  to  an individual  or  group  simply  because  the  service  provider, in good  conscience, does  not  agree  with behaviours  unique  to  the individual  or  group   unless  the service being provided  is  specifically  endorsing  that  unique  behaviour  with  which  the  service  provider  in good  conscience  does  not  agree.  


If  the above  applied  same  sex  persons  could  not  be  discriminated  against  simply  because  of  their  behaviours  and  the  Huguenins would  not be  punished  because  they did  not  provide a  service which endorses  behaviour  they do  not support.  However  as  clearly  demonstrated  by  both  the  same  sex  couple  and  the court  the intention of  the “utterly fascist, utterly Stalinist” Gaystapo  is  suppression of  freedom of  conscience.







xxxxxx   E N D S  xxxxxx

NM Court Says Christian Photographers Must Compromise Beliefs

Posted in Top Stories

NM Court Says Christian Photographers Must Compromise BeliefsAug 22, 2013

Print This Post Print This Post

By Todd Starnes

The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled Thursday that two Christian photographers who declined to photograph a same-sex union violated the state’s Human Rights Act. One justice said the photographers were “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.”


In 2006 Vanessa Willock asked Elaine and Jonathan Huguenin, owners of Elane Photography, to photograph a same-sex “commitment ceremony” in the town of Taos.

Huguenin and her husband declined the job because their Christian beliefs were in conflict with the message communicated by the ceremony.

Willock found another photographer at a cheaper price but nevertheless filed a complaint with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission accusing Elane Photography of discrimination based on sexual orientation. She was later found guilty and ordered to pay thousands of dollars in fines.

“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.

Bosson said the Christian photographers are now “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.”

“Though the rule of law requires it, the result is sobering,” he wrote. “It will no doubt leave a tangible mark on the Huguenins and others of similar views.”

A recent Rasmussen survey found that 85 percent of Americans support the right of a photographer to refuse participating in a same-sex wedding.

Bosson said the case provokes reflection on what the nation is about.

“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,” he wrote.

He said the Constitution protects the rights of the Christian photographers to pray to the God of their choice and following religious teachings, but offered a sobering warning.

“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.”

Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal firm specializing in religious liberty cases, representing the photographers. Attorney Jordan Lorence said the ruling in effect means gay rights now trump religious rights.

“Government-coerced expression is a feature of dictatorships that has no place in a free country,” Lorence said. “This decision is a blow to our client and every American’s right to live free.”

Lorence said the New Mexico Supreme Court undermined the constitutionally protected freedoms of expression and conscience.

“If Elane Photographer does not have her rights of conscience protected, then basically nobody does,” he told Fox News. “What you have here is the government punishing someone who says, ‘I, in good conscience, cannot communicate the messages of this wedding.’”

Amber Royster, the executive director of Equality New Mexico, called the court decision a big victory.

“What it came down to is this was a case about discrimination,” she told Fox News. “While we certainly believe we are all entitled to our religious beliefs, religious beliefs don’t necessarily make it okay to break the law by discriminating against others.”

Royster said forcing a business that offers services to the public to abide by discrimination laws does not violate the First Amendment – and does not pit gay rights against religious rights.

“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.”

Ken Klukowsi, of the Family Research Council, called the ruling profoundly disturbing.

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

Lorence said they are considering appealing the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“This is very coercive, very authoritarian to crush those who do not agree and make public examples of them – and in a free society, that simply should not be,” he said.


Ariz. Bill Decried As License to Discriminate

PHOENIX — The Arizona Legislature gave final approval Thursday to legislation that allows business owners asserting their religious beliefs to refuse service to gays and others, drawing backlash from Democrats who called the proposal “state-sanctioned discrimination” and an embarrassment.

The 33-27 vote by the House sends the legislation to Republican Gov. Jan Brewer and puts Arizona back at the forefront of a polarizing piece of legislation four years after the state enacted an immigration crackdown that caused a national furor.

Similar religious protection legislation has been introduced in Ohio, Mississippi, Idaho, South Dakota, Tennessee and Oklahoma, but Arizona’s plan is the only one that has passed.

Republicans stressed that the bill is about protecting religious freedom and not discrimination. They frequently cited the case of a New Mexico photographer who was sued after refusing to take wedding pictures of a gay couple and said Arizona needs a law to protect people in the state from heavy-handed actions by courts and law enforcement.

Opponents raised scenarios in which gay people in Arizona could be denied service at a restaurant or refused medical treatment if a business owner thought homosexuality was not in accordance with his religion.

All but three Republicans in the House backed the bill Thursday evening. The Senate passed the bill a day earlier on a straight party-line vote of 17-13.

Republican Sen. Steve Yarbrough called his proposal a First Amendment issue during the Senate debate.

“This bill is not about allowing discrimination,” Yarbrough said. “This bill is about preventing discrimination against people who are clearly living out their faith.”

Democrats say it is an outright attack on the rights of gays and lesbians.

“The heart of this bill would allow for discrimination versus gays and lesbians,” said Sen. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix. “You can’t argue the fact that bill will invite discrimination. That’s the point of this bill. It is.”

— The Associated Press

First published February 20th 2014, 8:54 pm


This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s