Breanna Koski and Joanna Duka of Brush & Nib.
“Artistic Freedom!” The new battle cry of religious people who do not want their lives or businesses tainted by anyone in that queer camp. Phoenix, Arizona has a non-discrimination law which has been working just fine. Now, a conservative law firm has found a business willing to be the poster child for an effort to knock down a law protecting LGBT people from discrimination with claims of artistic expression and “religious freedom.”
Joanna Duka and Breanna Koski own a calligraphy studio in Phoenix, Arizona called Brush & Nib Studio. They make all kinds of custom art, including wedding invitations and other items marrying couples might use. They’re also evangelical Christians who refuse to serve same-sex couples. Even though they haven’t yet been asked by such a couple, they’re partnering with the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) to file a legal complaint in Arizona state court attempting to overturn Phoenix’s nondiscrimination ordinance.
This pre-enforcement challenge is based on the idea that if they refused to sell the same services to same-sex couples that they already sell to opposite-sex couples, they would be penalized under the law. And the law, they argue, infringes on their right to freely express their religious beliefs.
Basically, they just don’t want to have to follow that law. Not only do they not want to have to serve marrying same-sex couples, but they also want to be able advertise their beliefs on their website so that same-sex couples don’t even bother asking for their services. Most importantly, they don’t want anybody else to have to follow it either. They’ve filed a facial complaint, asking for the entire law to be thrown out and made unenforceable.
“Joanna and Breanna must live authentic, holistic Christian lives,” the complaint reads. “They must seek to honor God in all aspects of their lives, including all aspects of their work, and must seek to serve God and their neighbors through their vocation. As a result, Joanna and Breanna cannot do anything in their business that violates their religious beliefs or dishonors God.”
The suit outlines just what the pair believes in detail:
Zack Ford has the full story here.
Artistic expression my arse. It’s outrageous for religious bigots to use this an excuse to legislate bigotry. There’s nothing stopping these people from painting “RELIGIOUS calligraphy” all over their storefront. There’s nothing stopping them from branding themselves as “Christian Brush & Nib”. Christian bookstores do this all over the place, and gosh, most of their clients are Christian. Who would have thought? Most people who aren’t bigoted assholes will choose to employ non-bigoted services. This is nothing more than a barely veiled attempt to turn over a non-discrimination law which is working well.
I think that they may find the “artistic expression” aspect is dangerous. Because if their religious artistic expression is protected, so is mine… And they might not like mine.
I still think that the way to advance on these issues is to offer a quid pro quo: “you stop with the anti LGBQT legislation attempts and we’ll stop with the ‘tax the churches’ legislation attempts. fair?” Because when religion starts having a legislative impact, what happens to its tax sheltered status …?
Marcus:
Unfortunately, nothing. I would love to see pressure applied in such a way, but it would be of limited use now. The reason so many of the religious ‘councils’ have popped up and grown, like Liberty Counsel, is because they cannot be pressured that way.
I’m all for the freedom of artistic expression, all artists are. In this case, that does not apply. No one is stopping them from having a calligraphic parchment in their storefront that states they are religious, or that they love god, whatever. They have all the freedom of artistic expression as anyone else. This has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of artistic expression.
This has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of artistic expression
If someone wanted to hire me to do portraits of an archbishop, though, I’d refuse. Even if I were acting in role of a “professional photographer” and not simply an artist. My refusal would be because: archbishop but it’d be predicated on my inability to represent them in a good light. That’s an aesthetic argument. I’m not sure it holds water or is fair. But it would save me having to smash my camera and say I’m not a photographer anymore.
Marcus:
If you have a store where you offer and advertise photographic portraits, and an archbishop strolls in to have a photo taken, I’d say yes, take the photo -- that’s what you’re in business to do. If you’re like me, and do various art pieces to show and sell, you can do whatever the fuck you like. You might not find a buyer, you might have trouble finding gallery space, but you do not have an open contract with the public.
That might seem like a fine line, but it isn’t. It’s actually a clear, bright line. If you open up a shop with an intent to serve the public, then that’s what you do. You aren’t allowed to discriminate either side of the line. No one says you have to like it, but yes, you need to go ahead and do what you declared you would do when you opened shop. As I said, there’s nothing stopping anyone putting up any amount of ‘religious!’ or ‘Christian’ or whatever all over their storefront or shop. At least that’s honest, and people who would have a problem with it can avoid it.
If you open up a shop with an intent to serve the public, then that’s what you do.
Yeah, I completely agree. This makes me realize that there is a grey zone of businesses that don’t have public store-fronts and service implicitly limited clientele. So, sure, I’d do a portrait plate for a friend of a friend’s wedding, I do not have a sign out front courting the attention of the general public. I suspect that there are loads and loads of caterers, portraitists, painters, handy-people, artists, craftspeople -- who work/sell only to limited public. I’d expect the bright line is when you incorporate and start to advertise your services. Until I do that, I think I’m a “hobbyist” not “a professional”
This one’s closer than others. Presumably the government can’t make somebody write something they don’t believe, so I don’t think an anti-discrimination law could require people to write something like “Christians must support [or oppose] same sex marriage” even in a work-for-hire purely on a free speech basis.
For Fuck’s Sake, no one has tried to do that. Not one queer person has gone into their fucking store. This is an attempt to dismantle an anti-discrimination law on the basis that some icky queer person might go into their store.
That’s absolutely their intent, I agree. Just saying that the homophobes are getting closer to a defensible legal position.
Is there a distinction between people and events such as homosexual events and events that celebrate homosexuality?What if these business women are perfectly fine serving homosexuals with non sexuality focused content such as birthdays, holidays, business cards, business signs, graphic design of product packaging. There are tons of services that homosexuals could access from these two women. It’s only the event of a homosexual wedding they do not wish to service. So can it be acceptable to love people but disapprove of events in a society that values freedom?
oops hahaha silly me I mean to put people instead on the first mention of the word ‘event’
“Is there a distinction between people and events such as homosexual -events- people and events that celebrate homosexuality?”
peter26:
Try reading the bloody article, there’s a link, you know. Then read it 10 more fucking times. What they want to do is wrong, end of fucking sentence.
You can disapprove of whatever the fuck you want, and no one is asking for your “love”. None of which has to do with opening a shop in order to provide a service to the public for money. In case you missed it, LGBTIA people are part of the public.
As I have not seen you before, here’s my one rule: don’t be an asshole. Peter26, you are an asshole, so go away and try actually reading the full article.
Ooops haha go fuck yourself. And don’t go thinking I don’t understand the meaning of your nym, or the asinine ‘love’ business. You can take your religious idiocy elsewhere.