Wednesday, a group of faith-based organizations submitted an amicus brief in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger case, arguing that the sobering reality of religiously based homophobia was used to place anti-gay religious doctrine into civil law — posing a real threat to religious liberty. The faith based organizations, which support and/or have performed same sex marriages, include the Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry, CA and the UULM Action Network, CA; CA Faith for Equality; CA Council of Churches and Church IMPACT; Progressive Jewish Alliance; General Synod of the United church of Christ and both its Southern & Northern CA Nevada Conferences; Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations; Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches; and the Pacific Association of Reform Rabbis.
As noted in Rev. Lindi Ramsden's statement on the Prop 8 Trial Tracker blog,
Allowing same-sex couples the right to marry threatens religious liberty of Catholics no more than does allowing civilly divorced citizens to marry in contravention of Catholic doctrine.
Allowing same-sex couples to marry no more threatens the religious liberty of those who oppose such unions in their churches and synagogues than permitting interfaith marriage threatens religious liberty of synagogues and rabbis who interpret their scripture and tradition to prohibit such unions–¦.
The real threat to religious liberty comes from enforcing as law religious doctrines of society's most powerful sects, to outlaw marriages that others both recognize and sanctify.
The amicus brief explains in depth how the wills of the Roman Catholic, Mormon, Southern Baptist and other Christian groups being enshrined in civil law through majority votes in ballot initiatives strip the First Amendment religious liberties of smaller, less funded denominations whose doctrines do not agree with the larger religious organizations that condemn homosexuality. The brief details the contempt that some of these religious groups hold against homosexuals and the churches that support them. The brief cites, for example, the view of the Southern Baptist Convention towards the Metropolitan Community Church:
The Southern Baptists' Rev. Jerry Falwell notoriously denounced them [the Metropolitan Community Churches] as "brute beasts," saying that their Church's "vile and satanic system will one day be utterly annihilated and there'll be a celebration in heaven." [draft amicus brief, page 4]
This is a point that GodDiscussion has been making all along with respect to banning same sex marriage: That no church having doctrines against homosexual unions will be "forced" to marry couples against its will, but a church whose doctrine does allow for same sex marriage loses its religious freedom. As stated in the brief at page 10:
The First Amendment would in any event preserve every religion's ability to make its own rules concerning its own religious marriages. No state may force any clergy to officiate at any wedding to which he or she objects. In fact, by adopting sectarian religious doctrine, Proposition 8 impinges directly upon the religious liberty of members and clergy of the faith traditions whose congregations and clergy have welcomed same-sex couples to enter legal marriages in religious ceremonies. Establishment-clause and free-exercise principles should operate together to prohibit the enactment, as law, of other sects' doctrines to deny legal status to those marriages.
The brief shows the sheer volume of financial and other contributions that the Catholic Church, LDS Church, Baptists and other Christian organizations used to influence the vote on Proposition 8, and the animus toward the GLBT community held by some of these groups. Yet, as stated in the brief, Proposition 8 has no rational basis and marriage equality does not deny religious freedom to denominations that condemn homosexuality.
Get our daily news and article headlines by email or RSS feed. 
