Scholars Weigh Impact Of Gay Marriage On Religious Rights

Mar 24, 2013 Full story: WITN 26

As the Supreme Court prepares to consider two gay marriage cases this week, scholars are weighing the impact the justices' ruling may have on religious rights.

Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Anonymous

Rosario, Argentina

#1 Mar 24, 2013
Let's get on with civilization and forget these tiresome superstitions ..

Since: Apr 08

Chagrin Falls, OH

#2 Mar 24, 2013
In places where same-sex marriage has been made legal, no religious group has been forced by any outside group to either conduct or even recognize these marriages.

Just like the Catholic Church is free to ignore divorce, and no religion is forced to conduct marriages for people not of that religion, religious groups are free to recognize and conduct only the marriages they approve of.

In other words there is absolutely no justification for denying legal recognition for same-sex marriages on religious grounds since no religious prerogatives are being infringed.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

33.00, -111.51

#3 Mar 24, 2013
Well, at my church, "St. Martin's Second Reformed Lutheran Church, Microbrewery & Gay Bar Of Tobyhanna" (we nned to buy TWO signs for the front of the church to fit all that on), our lesbian pastor solved this problem years ago !

:)
James

Goose Creek, SC

#4 Mar 24, 2013
My thoughts are very similar to that stated above, but the point I make is that government adopted the concept of marriage and assigned benefits to it....so they need to open the definition and allow gay marriage. Churches can continue to do what they want--accept the concept or not.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#5 Mar 24, 2013
The National Guard has a lot of experience keeping religious terrorists under control during times of civil unrest
http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/20...

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#6 Mar 24, 2013
Here's the crux:

" ... have to offer services and recognition to same-sex couples the same as they do for people with different religious beliefs."

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#7 Mar 24, 2013
snyper wrote:
Here's the crux:
" ... have to offer services and recognition to same-sex couples the same as they do for people with different religious beliefs."
No. You left out a key part of his sentence.

Alan Brownstein did not say that CHURCHES will "have to offer services... etc."

He stated that "people of faith" may have to offer services and recognition like they do for people with different religious beliefs.

What he means is that as individuals or corporate groups doing business with the general public, "people of faith" cannot refuse service to gay people or couples.

As purely private religious interests, churches or other religious organizations are protected by the First Amendment's Free Exercise clause from having to recognize any marriage or perform any service for any reason.

But individuals doing business with the general public do not have a "free exercise" right to refuse to do business with gay couples, just as they don't have a religious right to refuse service to interracial couples or interfaith couples.

Since: Jan 12

Port Richey, FL

#8 Mar 24, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
Well, at my church, "St. Martin's Second Reformed Lutheran Church, Microbrewery & Gay Bar Of Tobyhanna" (we nned to buy TWO signs for the front of the church to fit all that on), our lesbian pastor solved this problem years ago !
:)
You're neither cute nor funny just stupid

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#9 Mar 24, 2013
Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
No. You left out a key part of his sentence.
Alan Brownstein did not say that CHURCHES will "have to offer services... etc."
He stated that "people of faith" may have to offer services and recognition like they do for people with different religious beliefs.
What he means is that as individuals or corporate groups doing business with the general public, "people of faith" cannot refuse service to gay people or couples.
As purely private religious interests, churches or other religious organizations are protected by the First Amendment's Free Exercise clause from having to recognize any marriage or perform any service for any reason.
But individuals doing business with the general public do not have a "free exercise" right to refuse to do business with gay couples, just as they don't have a religious right to refuse service to interracial couples or interfaith couples.
Very well said, Jerald -- Bravo! And that is exactly how it should be. If I am a Muslim women who believes women should wear head scarves in public, and I work in a government office, I should not have the right based on my 'religious rights' to refuse government services to women who arrive without a head covering. However I would be fully within my rights to deny them entry into my community's mosque if they do not wear a head scarf. It seems so straightforward, doesn't it, but some religionists seem hell bent on complicating things.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#10 Mar 25, 2013
Gay And Proud wrote:
In places where same-sex marriage has been made legal, no religious group has been forced by any outside group to either conduct or even recognize these marriages.
Just like the Catholic Church is free to ignore divorce, and no religion is forced to conduct marriages for people not of that religion, religious groups are free to recognize and conduct only the marriages they approve of.
In other words there is absolutely no justification for denying legal recognition for same-sex marriages on religious grounds since no religious prerogatives are being infringed.
Since most ignore those who leave their religion, this is pretty much par for the course anyway.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

33.00, -111.51

#11 Mar 25, 2013
disaster in the making wrote:
<quoted text>
You're neither cute nor funny just stupid
You're WRONG, as usual.

:)

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

33.00, -111.51

#12 Mar 25, 2013
The first thing we should do is FULLY HOMOSEXUALIZE Christendom's largest denomination, the Roman Catholic Church !

Oh wait. We already did that decades ago.

Since: Apr 08

Chagrin Falls, OH

#13 Mar 25, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
The first thing we should do is FULLY HOMOSEXUALIZE Christendom's largest denomination, the Roman Catholic Church !
Oh wait. We already did that decades ago.
You have a very askew view of the world, Foxy. How could the Roman Catholic Church be "homosexualized" (which I presume you mean has been taken over by LGBT people) when the Roman Catholic Church continues to be one of the leading oppressors of LGBT rights worldwide?

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#14 Mar 25, 2013
James wrote:
My thoughts are very similar to that stated above, but the point I make is that government adopted the concept of marriage and assigned benefits to it....so they need to open the definition and allow gay marriage. Churches can continue to do what they want--accept the concept or not.
in fact, it was religion that adopted the gov't concept of marriage. governments were performing marriages for millenia before churches were...

Since: Jan 12

Port Richey, FL

#15 Mar 25, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
You're WRONG, as usual.
:)
Ok you're cute & funny

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

33.00, -111.51

#16 Mar 25, 2013
Gay And Proud wrote:
<quoted text>
You have a very askew view of the world, Foxy. How could the Roman Catholic Church be "homosexualized" (which I presume you mean has been taken over by LGBT people) when the Roman Catholic Church continues to be one of the leading oppressors of LGBT rights worldwide?
u hav no humor.

:(

Since: Jan 12

Port Richey, FL

#17 Mar 25, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
You're WRONG, as usual.
:)
Oh and must definitely stupid Happy now

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#18 Mar 25, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
in fact, it was religion that adopted the gov't concept of marriage. governments were performing marriages for millenia before churches were...
Have to agree. The Pilgrims, a very religious bunch, only performed civil marriages as was the custom in The Netherlands where they had fled from England before crossing the pond.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#19 Mar 25, 2013
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
Have to agree. The Pilgrims, a very religious bunch, only performed civil marriages as was the custom in The Netherlands where they had fled from England before crossing the pond.
it is just a fact of history, it is not even up for agreement or disagreement.

religion didn't get into the marriage game until the 14th century or so and then only to have some low-level church flunkie bless the state sponsored marriage on the steps of the church. it was over a century before that blessing was even brought inside hte church.

marriage is a social construct that is the purview of the state. just a basic fact.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

33.00, -111.51

#20 Mar 25, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>it is just a fact of history, it is not even up for agreement or disagreement.
religion didn't get into the marriage game until the 14th century or so and then only to have some low-level church flunkie bless the state sponsored marriage on the steps of the church. it was over a century before that blessing was even brought inside hte church.
marriage is a social construct that is the purview of the state. just a basic fact.
I agree.

And there is not enough separation of churhc and state in the U.S.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Next gay marriage fight: religious exemptions 12 min Reverend Alan 1,023
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 13 min lides 56,770
Is Vladimir Putin Another Adolf Hitler? 18 min Brilliant Bolshevik 2,228
Tim Cook: 'I'm proud to be gay' 20 min Xstain Mullah Aroma 6
California gay rights group to push for blood d... 26 min Walter 10
Fa-Foxy 48 min Delbert 10
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 57 min Guy Wiliford II 3,852
Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 3,315
Hayworth features gay son in ad 3 hr RalphB 22
Christian right key to Republican performance i... 4 hr Rainbow Kid 69

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE