Quantcast
This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Antonio Darden 2Just when you thought it was safe to get a touch-up from your gay hairdresser we come to find out that unless you want blue hair or crooked bangs, disagreeing with gay marriage can be detrimental to your hairdo.

In New Mexico, where gay marriage is still illegal, former Democrat, current Republican, Governor Susana Martinez dared to express her personal opinion that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

As a result of her traditional marriage conviction, her gay (as long as everyone agrees with him) hair stylist, Antonio Darden claims he dropped Martinez as a client.

The owner of Antonio’s Hair Studio, Darden has been with his male partner for 15 years. Antonio commented:

“It’s just equality, dignity for everyone. Everybody should be allowed the right to be together.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t Antonio been with his partner for 15 years? How exactly then has the governor’s stance on gay marriage impacted Antonio’s ability to be “together” with the man he’s spent almost two decades with?

Antonio must be some hair-cutter because one ardent Antonio fan, Vivian W. of Santa Fe, describes the hair cutting wunderkind this way:

I love going to Antonio’s Hair Studio. I feel that he has the realistic knowledge of hair styling, cutting and maintenance that I need.

He is very punctual, professional yet personable and ‘real’. It is always a pleasure to converse on many interesting topics or to be just comfortable with our silence as he works.

And I love the many birds and feeders outside the window. His care of nature adds to my knowledge that I am in good hands.

Despite Darden’s “care of nature,” the personable and “real” Antonio said that after he found out the governor had a conflicting opinion on a controversial subject of gay marriage he gave her the old heave-ho.

Martinez had her haircut from Darden three times, which means she didn’t oppose gay hair cutters and was willing to pay a fair wage for services regardless of sexual orientation.

Nonetheless, Antonio is making a name for himself among gay activists bragging:

“The governor’s aides called not too long ago, wanting another appointment to come in. Because of her stances and her views on this, I told her aides no.”

Mr. Darden maintains that the governor’s office was persistent about having the gay marriage activist style her coif. So much so, Martinez’s aides called back. Darden said, “They called the next day, asking if I’d changed my mind about taking the governor in and I said no.”

Now the governor’s office is denying Darden’s claim that he was the governor’s official hairdresser. Martinez’s spokesperson is saying that almost a year ago Antonio styled the governor’s hair maybe two or three times.

The New Mexico governor’s office feels the denial of services is more about publicity than same sex marriage.

Headlines of late highlight the controversy over the legality of denying sex couples wedding services from businesses like bakeries and wedding photographers. But in New Mexico at least, apparently it is acceptable for a homosexual business owner to deny services to someone for merely disagreeing with his or her lifestyle choice.

If what Antonio is saying is true, Martinez would be wise not to allow an angry gay man with scissors in his hand in the proximity of her throat.

Looks like Governor Susana Martinez may be forced to find herself a hairdresser without bird feeders who supports traditional marriage.

bird-feeder-1

 
 
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • BillYman

    Lets make her President !

  • justathought22

    Just another tolerant liberal!!!! She should sue him and force him to give her a hair cut and then sue again if he screws it up. Turn about is fair play!!!!

  • flanoggin

    Please let me correct you, since you asked so nicely: 1. Homosexuality is not a “lifestyle of choice” 2 “Correct me if I’m wrong, but hasn’t Antonio been with his partner for 15 years? How exactly then has the governor’s stance on gay marriage impacted Antonio’s ability to be “together” with the man he’s spent almost two decades with?” — by denying them marriage and the obligations that go along with marriage. Kind of like if you and your husband were allowed to shack up for almost two decades, but be legally barred from getting married. 3. I am more impressed with your second masters in social policy, thank you. :-)

  • Harold

    Isn’t it against the law to discriminate, oh I forgot it’s ok cause he’s gay.

  • Lidia Smith

    The gays demand “tolerance” but fail to practice it. Ms. Martinez probably can get better heterosexual hairstylist. I hope that this backfires on him and he looses his entire heterosexual cliental.

  • HoneyTree EvilEye

    Does she get to sue now? Force him to accept her for what she is the way he wants to force acceptance of his life on everyone else? I can’t stand the illegal part. It’s not illegal for him to be with his partner, or to marry. It just won’t be acknowledged by some. Who cares. This whole thing is not about what they keep claiming and it’s annoying as hell. It’s about their wanting to be superior to all of the straight people. They just came out with another study proving gay society only makes up about 3%, and in that around 60-70% don’t even strictly classify as gay, they claim bisexuality. So they’re also straight. It’s like they believe they’re the next wave of evolution and if we could all only see their way and become indiscriminate with how we get off we could be as good as them, but because we’re straight we’re less evolved, dumber, and a lower life form. So they want the govt. to put into law that they’re superior, and force their sexual desires on us. I wouldn’t be down with a lot of ways people get off but they don’t try to force me to unlike LGBT society. Be gay, get married(the ATF or the police aren’t going to stakeout your wedding and run a sting operation to arrest everyone), have couples rights, I’m down. Leave the rest of us out of it the way I would if I were married.

  • Scott Stroman

    So where is the media outrage about someone being denied services because of her lifestyle?

    • Deuce

      You’ll see it when the Hair stylist loses all his straight customers, but it will be on the side of the hair stylist, unfortunately. Remember Progressives don’t like cause and effect, thats why everyone gets a trophy.

  • AUMOM92

    Now if a straight stylist dropped a gay client because of their stand on gay marriage they would be sued or forced by the state to keep the client! Love how the tolerant left is only tolerant of those who think the same way as they do.

  • scott206

    I find it comical that when I was growing up in the 70′s and80′s, all I heard from the progressives was that marriage was an outdated concept. They all said that marriage was just a piece of paper, it didn’t matter if people were married as long as they loved each other, it was oppressive….blah, blah, blah. Now all of a sudden it’s the most important thing in the world because it’s an effective political tool.

    • Melissa Katsmom Votano

      Great point.

    • davidr2007

      I remember living in Cali in the 70′s and all the gays saying they just wanted to be treated equal, a civil union, be able to get on the other insurance, the Christians saying they would want marriage and the gays saying never and now? Just make everything a civil union, no more government sponsored marriage.

      • scott206

        I have no problem with a civil union, or domestic partnership….whatever you want to call it. But that’s the progressive way, nothing is ever good enough. If they see some tiny injustice (real or imagined) they jump all over the bandwagon to “fix” it. As soon as that’s done, they ask for more, all in the name of fairness. But in reality it’s an attempt to destroy us, one chink of the armor at a time. Progressives don’t really give a rip about gays, it’s just an excuse for them to thumb their noses at mainstream society. Once gay marriage is ratified, don’t be surprised when the polygamists, pedophiles and whatever else you can think of come running out of the woodwork with a team of lawyers using the same arguments gay marriage proponents used. Soon we’ll all be bigots and haters because we don’t accept the lifestyle that they consider “normal” and “natural”.

      • Barrustio

        Yeh ….but then they would sue the churches for not providing a wedding

  • Jerry Bono

    So it’s evidently legal for fags to discriminate against heterosexuals but not the other way around?

  • modcop

    People should be able to deny service to anyone that they have great moral differences with. And it goes both ways. Gays should not be immune from the same treatment. But that being said, just because you can, it doesn’t mean you have to or should. It should be a person’s right but rights don’t always have to be exercised.

  • Melissa Katsmom Votano

    Waging finger…..you can’t do that. In the Civil Rights Act of 1964 buried deep down in it is a paragraph that states if you are open for business you are open to everyone.

  • Patti O’Z

    Maybe the Governor could go to a stylist who does the job. An equality for all means people can have a different opinion and still be served or taken care of.

    • Barrustio

      Or the governor could sue the same way the baker was sued….chances are this stylist has more than the baker (money wise)

  • Irish78623

    Wait a minute, so a Baker can’t deny to bake a cake for a Gay wedding on the grounds that it would be against their religious beliefs to be involved in the event, But a hair stylist can refuse to serve someone because they don’t agree with them?

    • MarieJ27

      It was never about a piece of cake at a wedding.

      • livefreeordie

        And this isn’t about just a hair cut. Turn around is fair play in the real world, but not in the liberal’s.

      • Barrustio

        Not at THAT wedding…surely not a “piece of cake”

        • MarieJ27

          Actually, I am seeing more cupcakes at weddings than a huge expensive cake no one eats.

  • davidr2007

    I am confused, so the straight baker has to make gays a wedding cake but the gay hairstylist reserves the right to deny services to straight people?!?!

    • Barrustio

      Yep even the baker ….after he makes the cake for his wedding

  • Elizabeth Boyer Lowe

    Double standards at it again. Evidently gays have a right to refuse service to straight people for what they believe, but straight people don’t have the same rights. UGH. I just wish to GOD they’d stayed in the damned closet, everyone kept their sexuality, preferences and bedroom antics to themselves and we could just LIVE OUR LIVES IN FREAKING PEACE!

    • Barrustio

      Well just fight back with modern values…like I’m doing right now….I’m coming out…..I’m a heterosexual and I want everybody to know it :-)

      • Elizabeth Boyer Lowe

        Exactly! Maybe we should go into the T-shirt and hat business….

        “HETERO AND PROUD OF IT!”
        And make sure it has an America FLAG on it too! :)

        • Barrustio

          Liz, may call you Liz? I like your style of thinking…..pushing “traditional” values while being patriotic at the same time….what a concept in these times.

          • Elizabeth Boyer Lowe

            Yes, you sure may call me Liz, my friends do! Thanks so much for the compliment. It is a pretty “radical” concept these days, but it will prevail, I’m sure of that! If you wish to do so, find me on FB and add me!

          • Barrustio

            Sure will… if I can get the hang of this social media thing….keep in mind I’m “old school” with old school values and traditions…..why I still have a flip phone and a beeper :-)

          • Elizabeth Boyer Lowe

            No kidding? I still carry around a “dumb” phone as well! I HATE smart phones and the fact that wherever I go people have their faces buried in their phones ALL the time, including my husband! There are times when I wish they had never invented “smart” phones.

          • Barrustio

            I remember the “good old days” when nothing was so pressing that you would have to stop conversation while driving to make a phone call. If it was an emergency you pulled over to use the “public telephone”

  • drofelkcahs

    If government got out of the marriage business we wouldn’t have all of this hoopla about gay marriage. If nobody got special consideration because of their marital status there would be no mention of homosexual weddings. Marriage is a religious institution protected by the first amendment, not a way to get government bennies.

    • Colin Rafferty

      Absolutely. If marriage were just a social convention, gays wouldn’t care. But it effects everything from Social Security to health insurance to taxes. There are hundreds of legal benefits to being married to your long-term partner, which is why it’s so important to not deny it to people based on personal preferences.

      • Barrustio

        If the same could be achieved through “civil union” would they be happy …..no it MUST be marriage

        • Colin Rafferty

          A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. If a “civil union” law gave all the benefits of civil marriage, gays would be fine with that. But none have ever been proposed.

          All civil union proposals and laws are cynical dodges that ape some of the aspects of marriage, but aren’t close. Where are the tax advantages or Social Security survivor benefits (to name two examples)?

          And to put it personally, how would you feel if you were told you couldn’t marry the person you love and wanted to spend the rest of your life with?

          • Barrustio

            As many have brought up ….it was once about being able to have ALL the same benefits of civil marriage which I totally agree should be granted…..but I’m about ending this back and forth which seems to have no end ….there has to be a compromise and abandoning the thought which BOTH sides hold ….that something is being forced down our throats…..granting ALL benefits in a civil union would grant that…but then I would be accused of telling someone they can’t marry the person they love and want to spend their whole life with.

          • Colin Rafferty

            So why the different names? What would one have that differentiates it from the other?

          • Barrustio

            Public restrooms differentiate also but all get a fair and equal chance to pee….not all things in life are cut and dry. As I said…..in the past EQUALITY in benefits rights used to be the argument for fairness now it seems more about rubbing it in someone’s face

          • Colin Rafferty

            And they are both called “bathrooms”. As for what happened in the past, people weren’t even getting equality of benefits, and still aren’t. What is it about civil marriage that you think should not be included in civil union? If they are identical, what’s the point of having different names?

          • Barrustio

            My point with the bathrooms was that you can have separate but equal. If men and women are equals what’s the point and having different names

          • Colin Rafferty

            Ok, I’ll take you seriously about bathrooms. They are different because shared public bathrooms are used with strangers, and in our society, people feel more comfortable peeing with members of the same sex.

            This is different from marriage, because it’s only people that know each other who want to get married.

            So, what would be the difference between your ideal “civil union” and current civil marriage?

          • Deuce

            The difference has nothing to do with whats it’s called. All government have always given special treatments to marriages because it’s about continuation of society. That is why there are Tax benefits given to families with children. It really has nothing to do with “equality” other then it’s a good was for Democrats to act like they care, and Republican’s to act like they care about the other side.
            If we got rid of the Socialist programs, and yes social security is a socialist program where do you think the social comes from, and other perceived government “benefits” then it would come down to a persons faith. If the couple Church would preside over marriage of same sex, then they could say they are married, if their church wont, then they wont get married in the eyes of the church. If this were the case however, then we’d have to get rid of the current tax code (which I’m all in favor of) and do something like a flat or fair tax where there are not benefits (loopholes or deductions) for anyone.
            Believe it or not the Free market would work it out without Government getting in the way.
            The hair dresser has the right to refuse to server her, however, others have the right to refuse the hair dresser service at the same time. Just remember the benefits given to married straight couples has to do with the ability to reproduce as that is needed to continue society, yes I know gay couples can adopt and they are given the child tax breaks for that already.

          • Colin Rafferty

            You are correct. If there were no legal benefits to being married, then no one would care. But in this particular society, there are, and those benefits are not going away.

            Refusing to grant those benefits based on the relative sexes of the spouses is no more moral than refusing based on the relative ethnicities.

            The hair dresser has no more right to refuse to serve her then a racist has to refuse to serve a black person. It is strictly illegal.

          • Barrustio

            Actually the way we’re going women will be forced to share public rest rooms with men …..mark my word …..there are many things happening right now in society which we said would never happen. Some findpolygamy more acceptable than other lifestyles and why limit marriage to two people who love each other if it’s possible for several people to love each other why can’t they marry? Isn’t it unfair to deprive them of love simply because we don’t see it their way?

          • Colin Rafferty

            Yes, it is unfair.

            But what is the difference between your ideal civil union and legal marriage?

      • drofelkcahs

        I’m happily unmarried and straight. I am not in favor of the government setting married people apart for special consideration. I don’t support Muslims trying to nullify Constitutional law with Sharia law, but I respect their religious belief that polygamy is acceptable. I don’t think anyone with multiple wives should be rewarded with tax exemptions any more than monogamous couples should be so
        rewarded.
        I don’t think a person’s religious unions should qualify him for tax breaks. If everybody, including rich people, paid taxes in proportion to their income we wouldn’t need breaks. I am not stupid enough to believe that will happen, either.

  • livefreeordie

    When I read the title, I thought he had given her a buzz cut.

  • Barrustio

    So this is liberal tolerance eh. They sue because Christians refuse to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding yet it’s alright for them to refuse service to a person with Christian views…..sounds like a double standard to me….but then some people feel the need to be “special”

  • http://www.facebook.com/sstephaniew stephanie wilson

    this is stupid! gays are already allowed to be together! the prob. is now they want marriage! screw that!

  • Diane

    Is the governor suing this hairstylist for refusing to service her? If it were the other way around there would be a suit and national news attention. Why is he allowed to get away with this kind of prejudice? It would seem to me that this is illegal.

  • Barrustio

    Seems the governor would have the same options as those gays who were refuse wedding cakes and photography sessions …..which is to sue…..if you are into public services you cannot discriminate against someone for having traditional values.