Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Love, Joy, Feminism

Home
Nonreligious
Conservatives Grapple with Marriage Equality

Conservatives Grapple with Marriage Equality

Last updated on: June 30, 2015 at 7:15 am by Libby Anne

Conservatives Grapple with Marriage Equality 2015-06-30T07:15:10-04:00 Libby Anne

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Almost as soon as I heard about yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling, my mind turned to the ways conservatives would respond. I have not been disappointed.

See, for example, this argument from Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council:

Five Justices on the Supreme Court have overturned the votes of 50 million Americans and demanded that the American people walk away from millennia of history and the reality of human nature. In reaching a decision so lacking in foundation in the text of the Constitution, in our history, and in our traditions, the Court has done serious damage to its own legitimacy.

Tony may be unaware of this, but it is my understanding that our government was set up the way it was to prevent democracy from robbing people of basic human rights. After all, a pure democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on who they should eat for dinner. Our government is not that, and it is my understanding that the judicial branch especially was created to ensure that will of the majority does not violate the rights of the minority. In this sense, it is completely irrelevant that the Supreme Court overturned “the votes of 50 million Americans.”

When Loving v. Virginia ruled against anti-miscegenation laws in 1967, they made voided laws against interracial marriage still on the books in the 16 states. Presumably, lawmakers in those sixteen states had passed laws against interracial marriage with the support of their constituents. Indeed, over 50% of the American public opposed interracial marriage as late as 1995. Sometimes the will of the people—and, yes, the votes of the people—should be overturned.

But honestly, Tony is barking up the wrong tree even here. The majority of Americans have supported marriage equality since 2010. The Supreme Court did not in fact rule against the will of the people, and appealing to the will of the people here is self-defeating. And given the rapid rise of support for marriage equality, we can expect those numbers to only rise. Tony and others cannot continue appealing to “the will of the people” if their position becomes the minority one, as it already has.

Now let’s turn to Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage:

We urge the American people and future presidents to regard today’s decision just as President Abraham Lincoln regarded the Dred Scott ruling when he said in his first inaugural address that “if the policy of the government upon vital questions, affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made…the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”

Is Brian really comparing the Obergefell decision, which allowed gay, lesbian, and bisexual couples to marry, to the Dred Scott decision, which declared that African Americans, slave or free, were not citizens? Yes, yes he is. Because apparently allowing gay people to marry is basically the same as denying black people any rights whatsoever. Or something like that.

Why would Brian compare this decision to the most notable pro-slavery Supreme Court decision? Well for one thing, this is a thing conservatives do. For decades now conservatives have been comparing abortion to the holocaust and to slavery. Roe v. Wade is often compared to Dred Scott. Conservatives in general and evangelicals in particular see themselves as part of the abolitionist tradition, fighting for freedom and against oppression. But something about this doesn’t seem to fit when applied to marriage equality, given that conservatives are working to deny individuals certain rights based on their group status.

But let’s get one thing clear right now—evangelicals and other supporters of traditional marriage are becoming increasingly concerned that they may be prosecuted or stigmatized for their belief that marriage should only be between one man and one woman. They point to cases of bakers being prosecuted for refusing to provide cakes for gay weddings as evidence of an impending crackdown on those who believe homosexuality is a sin. They, then, see this case as a nail in the coffin of their own criminalization.

Are evangelical concerns valid? Yes and no.

Let me start with the obvious: No one is going to criminalize holding anti-gay beliefs. After all, we have not criminalized holding racist views. We do not arrest people for being white supremacists, and we will not arrest people for being anti-gay. Talk of concentration camps for those who believe homosexuality is sin is utterly ludicrous.

But.

While we do not criminalize holding racist views, we as a society do tend to marginalize those who hold overtly racist views (covert racism is generally another story). Similarly, while no one is going to round people up for believing that gay is sin, an increasing number of people have come to see that belief as bigoted. This is not a government thing, this is a public opinion thing. Evangelicals are free to argue that their beliefs are not in fact bigoted, but others are just as free to disagree.

While we do not criminalize holding racist beliefs, we do criminalize discriminating against others based on those views. To be specific, businesses are not allowed to deny service based on race. The same will likely become true of sexual orientation. So while evangelicals are free to believe that being gay is a sin, they will not be free to act on that belief by discriminating against gay, lesbian, and bisexual couples. Evangelicals are free to argue that such restrictions are wrong, but others are free to disagree.

Which is more important—gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals’ right to not be discriminated against, or evangelicals’ right to discriminate against gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals? This is a question we as a society have yet to answer conclusively, given the current haphazard nature of anti-descrimination statues. Of course, we answered this question decades ago when it comes to race, and I suspect (and hope) that the answer will be the same here as well.

It’s worth remembering that nondiscrimination laws do not apply the same way everywhere. Just as pastors are free to refuse to marry interracial couples they will also be allowed to refuse to marry gay, lesbian, and bisexual couples. Nondiscrimination laws tend to apply to businesses but not to churches.

There are some additional questions that will have to be worked out as well. For example, the tax exempt status of Christian schools and colleges may become an issue in upcoming years just as the tax exempt status of many Christian schools and colleges was in question when said schools barred interracial dating or refused to admit nonwhite students. Evangelicals will similarly object to public school curriculum that normalizes marriage equality, but then, that has already been an issue for years now.

How do we sort these questions out? When it comes to public school curriculum, normalizing homosexuality is little different from normalizing pluralism in general. Part of the mission of public schools is to give America’s children similar underlying values—things like freedom and equality—and to promote societal cohesion (which in a pluralistic country means teaching tolerance and acceptance of differences). As for Christian schools and colleges, well, we as a society will have to decide whether we are comfortable with public monies going to support institutions that discriminate against gays, lesbians, and bisexuals and teach that homosexuality is a sin. (Some will argue, of course, that receiving a tax exemption is different from receiving public funds.)

Could one argue that opposition to gay rights is more religious than cultural while opposition to the civil rights movement was more cultural than religious? Perhaps, but this is not self-evidently true to me. Opposition to gay rights is pretty cultural itself—anyone looking at the history of gay rights in the twentieth century will notice that much of modern homophobia was developed in a secular context during the 1940s and 1950s. Even so, many evangelical churches preached racial segregation from the pulpit throughout most of the twentieth century, basing their position in scripture.

There are really only two things I can say for sure here: First, evangelicals will not be arrested or otherwise rounded up simply on the basis of believing that homosexuality is sin; and Second, the next few years will be interesting indeed.

Note: An earlier version of this article left out bisexual couples and thus contributed to bi erasure. Many thanks to those who brought this to my attention!

Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism

Politics

LGBTQ

marriage

Previous Post

June 26, 2015

Marriage Equality: An Open Thread

Next Post

June 28, 2015 Lesbian Duplex 22: An Open Thread

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Atheism Evangelicalism/Fundamentalism Family Feminism Homeschool Meta Parenting Patriarchy Politics Purity Quiverfull Social Justice Uncategorized Worthwhile reads

Select a Month February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

True or False: Romans teaches that creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay.

Select your answer to see how you score.

FALSE TRUE