The following news item somehow didn’t appear in the mainstream media that I can find:  the HuffPo and some homosexual lobbying type publications seem to be about it.  And no wonder, considering what the Supreme Court of New Mexico has done to the liberties of New Mexicans.

New Mexico Supreme Court Rules Couple’s Photo Business Must Serve Homosexuals

(Fox News) The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision Thursday that a wedding photographer who refused to provide services to a same-sex couple violated the state’s Human Rights Act. “[W]e conclude that a commercial photography business that offers its services to the public, thereby increasing its visibility to potential clients, is subject to the antidiscrimination provisions of the [New Mexico Human Rights Act] and must serve same-sex couples on the same basis that it serves opposite-sex couples,” the state’s highest court ruled. “Therefore, when Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the NMHRA in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races.”

Nathan: This is disgusting. This ruling is a sick joke and the five Nazgul who did this deserve to be stripped of everything.  They are traitors to their own constitution and that of the united States. And they recognize that, which shows them to be gutless worms:  the justice wrote the opinion stating the Christian photographers are now “compelled by law to compromise the very religious beliefs that inspire their lives.”  What evil to reject their own Bill of Rights, where section 17 reads: “ Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions for libels, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged as libelous is true and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquitted.”

I have, I am embarrassed to admit, roots in New Mexico. Some not too distant relatives (grandparents and a parent) were born and partially raised in New Mexico.  I am the first to admit that New Mexico’s state government is a joke studying to be a farce, whether it be a Democratic or Republican government.  It smells too much like a typical Hispanic government in so many ways (remember, it was a Spanish colony for almost two and a half centuries before it became a “self-governing” territory” of the US for almost sixty years, and now a “free, sovereign, and independent state” for just over a century.  Its culture, its traditions, its society have many good features and its land and people are beautiful.  But it is a vindictive, arbitrary, illogical, and capricious state government, and the local versions are even worse.  This is typical:  they think that “democracy” outweighs moral law and liberty must take a back seat to “toleration” as defined by those who are the most intolerant of people, as witness the women who started this court case seven years ago.

A “conservative” radio talker (really a small-mouthed minarchist “libertarian” correctly points out that these gonadless wonders have made it clear:  the state does not intend to allow New Mexicans (or those doing business in the state) to worship God and speak freely, if doing so is in conflict with the State’s priority:  the STATE is GOD. He also correctly points out that any who call themselves “libertarian” and do not oppose this immoral act by the five Nazgul are NOT libertarian, just statists who like to dress up in the skins of their prey.

Even Colorado is more free now than New Mexico.  I don’t know where refugees from New Mexico can go – I actually do NOT want them to come to South Dakota or Wyoming, for fear that the liberal intolerance and hatred of liberty is contagious and they will bring more of it to the more-free lands of the Northern Plains and Rockies.  But I fear, too, that if New Mexicans (like Kurt McDonigal in Clovis) do not stay in their homes and fight, that ultimately, it will be us, our children and our children’s children fighting invading armies of New Mexicans seeking to bring the blessings of “liberal democracy” to us poor benighted denizens of the Heartland, whether we want it or not.

Mama’s Note: The question isn’t really a matter of belief in God, or who/what one worships as such. The question is the right of self ownership, free association, as well as the freedom to use one’s own property as one sees fit. Those are the rights being violated. The photographer, as well as any other person, has the right to trade with, associate with, and live with anyone or anything they want – for any reason or NO reason. To impose anything else is simply aggression, tyranny.

It’s exactly the same when some people advocate the use of government to force businesses to allow employees and customers to carry guns if they want. There is simply no difference between this use of force, and the idiotic story above. Self ownership, private property, free association, and the right to refuse to associate or trade with anyone, especially on your own property.