Will gay marriage hurt freedom of religion?

by jam 24 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  jam

  Sorry if this have been posted before.

  But in my local newspaper today an interesting article.

  Red Blue America..

  The first Amendment and same-sex marriage cannot coexist harmoniously. Something will have to give---and it will start with the freedom of conscience.

  Here's why: If the law says there can be no "rational basis" for treating the union between a man and a woman as something unique-if a union between any two(or,perhaps someday, more) consenting adults is a "marriage"----then it really doesn't matter what your conscience tells you.

  We don't prosecute people for holding unpopular beliefs--yet- but the authorities do look askance at discrimination. That's why we hear so much lately about caterers, photographers and florists running afoul of several states' civil rights laws for refusing to do business with gay couples.

  It's only a matter of time before what we understand as "freedom of religion" is whittled down to little more than the freedom to worship whatever deity you choose in a special building one day out of the week.

  This is not the entire article, just a few key points. What do you think?
• 

  BackseatDevil

  The first admendment states such " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

  Now, inclusion of gay marriage does not mean exclusion of a previously assigned "establishment of religion"... such as heterosexual marriages.

  Religion, as a whole is not touched. Now, it is presented that way because Christians as a whole tend to think in spiritual warfare mode. "equal marriage" becomes "an attack on marriage", etc. When you remove religion from the issue (which our founding fathers often did) you get a matter of civics and community growth... social evolution if you will.

  But apart from that, religions as a whole are not being asked to give up anything. The laws of the land, and civic equality is a different matter.
• 

  Simon

  First amendment is about rights but with rights come responsibilities and the rights are not absolute and don't override other people's rights.

  You do not have the right to discriminate against people based on color, religion, gender or sexual preference.

  It's really simple.

  If your religion preaches otherwise then I'm sorry, it's a religion of hate and people need to re-evaluate it. People are free to worship it in so far as it doesn't violate the rights of others.

  The US needs a "zeroth right" to basic human decency and respect and recognition that there should be more focus on responsibilities (what you owe others) and less on rights (what others owe you).
• 

  jam

  Backseat: From article, Freedom of association is also in

  jeopardy. Boy Scouts voted to srip them of their tax-

  exempt status here in CA. The BSA isn,t a religious group

  though in recent years churches have been the primary

  sponsors of scout troops. Democrats don,t care about

  the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right to define their

  membership. Does anyone seriously think churches won't

  be punished, too?
• 

  jam

  I would love to be around 50-100 years from now just to

  see the new teaching from the bible, new understanding.

  It must change or the bible will be obsolete.
• 

  BackseatDevil

  The main reason institutions of a religious nature get in trouble usually (not always) has to do with money. Many cases where you hear of churches getting sued and such is because they offer something (a wedding hall or a banquet area) to the "public" and recieve tax-free money in return and in some cases goverment money as well (especially if it's part of the parks & recreations department). When same sex couples want to use those facilities, then suddenly there's a problem. The conflict comes when a church picks and chooses the "public" they wish to serve.

  I, as a gay male, personally think the Boy Scouts should be allowed to operate as a private organzation... however they choose... without government or social interference. And I think churches should as well. When churches, come over to our side of the aisle and bite... we will bite back and it seems like we are attacking churches - I totally get that. But me personally... i think churches should operate however they choose.

  Now, I will add two things: I personally belive that men and women are equal. there is no difference between them other than their private parts. For such, their "roles" in marriage (if you want to refer to it that way) are interchangable. We see this with many single parents who have to take on the "role" of both mother and father to their child. It's how we adapt to the situation.

  The second thing is that the world does change... it does evolve. It was only 110 years ago when the general view of courts said men couldn't beat their women as a form of punishment. Today domestic violence is a criminal offense. Sociologically, things change. So the human race is starting to reach overpopulation and now more and more homosexuals are coming onto the scene. Is that a bad thing? Should a society let us keep running wild and free or will they give us the opporitunity to be tied down with a 'ball and chain'?? LOL.

  Part of that social evolution is taking place in a capitalist society... meaning if companies choose to NOT support institutions because of their stand on gays, that's their choice. It's capitalism. The Boy Scouts aren't being punished any more than you punish a child by not giving them candy. But it does suck, and I do understand why people get upset about the issue.

  But at no time, do we... as the LGBT community ever want to march into your church and dismantle the things you hold dear. I promise.

  -James

  Backseatdevil.com
• 

  Comatose

  Who cares? Down with any religion which is unhealthy and treats certain people unfairly. I can't see why in a modern society in this day we as a people would say two people who love each other and want to commit are unworthy of benefits a boy and girl have. It's discrimination. I could see someone acknowledging its discrimination and unfair, but saying the bible says I have to, so I have to. But, a government and country as a whole??? The government should leave the bible and all religion out of its decisions and decide based on rational fairness.
• 

  voltaire2

  Yes, down with any religion that doesn't respect all people and treat them fairly! Who decides what is fair and respectful behavior? I guess the government will let us know what religions, civic groups and voluntary organizations deserve first amendment protection. Comatose, I hope you manage to keep up with all government-sponsored thinking. Hate to see you in a re- education camp.
• 

  BackseatDevil

  This is a civics matter not a religious one. the further you keep religion away, the easier this decision becomes. You can't judge it a "moral" issue if the people involved do not believe what they are doing is immoral. Just like JW's, you cannot fear Hell if you don't believe it exists. And yes, sometimes we need the government to step in and help clairify the "all men are created equal" part of the Declaration of Independence. The only people making it religious are relighions.
• 

  Barrold Bonds

  A gay marriage thread? *gets popcorn*

  The last one was amazing. All sorts of bigots came crawling out of the woodwork.