The Constitutional First Amendment speech right trumps any Statutory (not in the Constitution) anti-discrimination laws.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights is the highest law of the land. Any time you try to saw away at the Constitution in an attempt to restrict a protected freedom, you have to have a compelling reason of imperative benefit to all.
The desire (not right) of gays to have their weddings photographed does not rise to that standard.
The mechanism of turning away this customer is the only "path to relief" that the photographer has to avoid being compelled to commit personally objectionable speech.
"Now, while I can appreciate that not everyone will agree, I would hope that many/most will think that discussing current events and a major law being passed in our state would be a good topic of discussion amongst school children. After all, they live under this law. More importantly, as France notes later in his post, this was to be an open discussion with no push on telling kids they should "agree" with the law. It was purely a teaching moment."
Outside of a Secondary level (pre-adult) "Social Studies" class, this subject matter is simply not appropriate for school children, especially "young children" (K-9).
Any attempts to rationalize this as appropriate "rides the line" on attempted premature sexualization of children, an odd and disgusting fascination of the liberal/progressive mindset.
As for the school's internet filters, the filters should be set up to whitelist less than 50, maybe 100 age appropriate reference material sites that are directly required to support a documented lesson plan.
Mr. Sampson needs to petition the courts to vacate and seal each and every one of those trespassing arrests and if I were the sitting Judge, I'd vacate and seal the weed bust too just for good measure.
The news of this can't be sitting too well with the good folks who live in that county and if I were the local DA, I'd be getting out in front of this by empaneling a Grand Jury before the PD has time to get their lies all in a line.
Let's be clear on this. This is not a case of "good men going too far". This is a clear-cut case of governmental corruption and conspiracy.
If I was negotiating a contract with a large network carrier, I would specify as part of the contract that the carrier had to send a daily email to my security officer attesting to the fact that NO tap, pen register, or National Security Letter orders had been served upon their premises that would surveil my network traffic.
When the emails stop coming, I know I have a problem.
You are a disgrace to the Senate and your lies to the American people are a slap in the face to every citizen (and their families) who has served their country with honor and the belief that they served a leadership that understood the fundamental difference between right and wrong.