The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday from a studio that refused to photograph a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony, letting stand a New Mexico high court ruling that helped spur a national debate over gay rights and religious freedom. The justices left in place a unanimous state Supreme Court ruling last year that said Elane Photography violated New Mexico's Human Rights Act by refusing to photograph the same-sex ceremony "in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races." Elane Photography co-owner Elaine Huguenin said taking the photos for Vanessa Willock and her partner would violate her religious beliefs. She said she also has a right of artistic expression under the First Amendment that allows her to choose what pictures to take, or refrain from taking.This says, explicitly and specifically, that YOU CANNOT REFUSE TO MAKE ART FOR PARTY MEMBERS. You are still free to refuse commissions or requests from Heretics, but you aren't allowed to ask or determine or guess whether the requester is a Heretic or a Person Of Gender, so in effect you can't refuse any requests or commissions at all. On the surface this may seem like the opposite of censorship, but this is exactly how Stalin did it. If you are being paid by The Party to produce works that celebrate The Party, you can't spend any of your time doing anti-Party work. It's a non-compete contract. Imagine you're running a studio, and you typically accept commissions for small painted portraits. An orthodox Person Of Gender minces into your studio and presents a properly filled-out purchase order. You are hereby commissioned to create no paintings at all for the next year, and the Person Of Gender is paying you $0.00 because it's zero work. YOU CAN'T REFUSE THE COMMISSION because it was presented by a Person Of Gender. You must produce NOTHING for the next year, and you must receive $0.00 for the non-work. RIP art.
The current icon shows Polistra using a Personal Equation Machine.