Here's how Church's enemies will try to force same-sex marriages
The Democrat controlled House of Representatives passed the Equality Act last week. It will be close in the Senate. I suspect it will likely not pass. If it does, hopefully President Trump will veto it.
I've read a few articles about it. One of the more interesting ones is an opinion piece in USA Today, whose author is a gay conservative
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/05/20/lgbtq-equality-act-fails-fair-religious-freedom-provisions-accommodation-column/3731197002/
The article states:
The broad, vague definitions in the bill could easily be used to define houses of worship as "public accommodations" which would then become subject to the anti-discrimination law.
The Heritage Foundation identifies 5 groups that could be harmed if the Equality Act becomes law.
https://www.heritage.org/gender/heritage-explains/the-equality-act
On the surface, adding "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" as protected classes is a good idea. But the bill is far to sweeping in its inclusions and ambiguity. And it removes protection of religious rights.
Here's a link the the Church's statement on the Equality Act
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900070426/lds-mormon-church-religious-freedom-full-statement-gay-lgbtq-rights.html
The proposed law, as mentioned by the Church's statement and others, does not advocate for a balanced "fairness for all" approach. It essentially puts LGBTQ+ in an exceptionally protected class that is like a trump card to override any other laws (or even Constitutional rights).
As the Deseret News reported, the Equality Act "limits the application of current federal religious freedom law, weakening religious conservatives’ ability to defend themselves in court"
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900071063/president-donald-trump-2020-election-equality-act-religious-freedom-abortion-rights-roe-v-wade-supreme-court.html
The Deseret News also reported
However, the odds are high that churches who perform any civilly recognized marriage will become required to perform marriages for all couples who request it. Even if same-sex marriage is against the tenets of the religion, because the marriage is a publicly recognized union, and could be argued as a "public accommodation," the church would become subject to the law to not discriminate against LGBTQ couples wanting to get married.
Of course, this would extend to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and temple marriages.
Thankfully the Church has already set a standard.
https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/couples-married-civilly-authorized-for-immediate-temple-marriage
Couple who are married civilly first will not have to wait, but can be sealed in a temple marriage immediately after the civil marriage, or as soon as circumstances permit.
While this policy has been in place in many other countries, where couples are required to be married civilly first, it established a worldwide policy.
It is a new and unfamiliar policy for many members of the Church in the U.S. and most probably see it as a policy that can allow for non-members of the Church to participate with a civil marriage, but still allow the couple to enjoy the blessing of an immediate temple sealing.
However, what this policy does, and nowhere is this mentioned, is prepare the Church for the time (which I believe is coming) when anyone performing a civil marriage will be required to perform marriages for all couples requesting it. When this happens, the Church will be able to decide to stop performing civilly recognized marriages and only perform the temple sealing for couples. And, because of the new policy, couples will be able to get married civilly and immediately go to the temple for their sealing.
Because the temple sealing would be considered a "spiritual" marriage and not civilly-recognized, the law will not have any effect on it. Same-sex couples and their supporters will be frustrated at their inability to force the Church to perform same-sex marriages.
Since this policy was set as a global standard before the Equality Act (or similar law) takes effect, the policy is easily defended as being set without regard to the LGBTQ community.
Had the Church waited to implement this policy until after a law like the Equality Act were put into place, enemies of the Church could easily twist the policy and (the future) decision as being biased towards same-sex people.
Of course, opponents of the Church will still claim bias when the Church no longer performs civil marriages, but at leas there will be a little less fodder for the critics with the policy already in place.
Personally, I think the Equality Act, or similar law, probably won't be passed until the Democrats control both houses of Congress. Even if there's a Republican president, if the Democrats have the majority they will push it through, especially if they have a veto-proof majority. The earliest this might happen is in two years: 2021.
I've read a few articles about it. One of the more interesting ones is an opinion piece in USA Today, whose author is a gay conservative
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/05/20/lgbtq-equality-act-fails-fair-religious-freedom-provisions-accommodation-column/3731197002/
The article states:
The bill purports to protect LGBT Americans like me by prohibiting discrimination “based on sex, sexual orientation and gender identity in areas including public accommodations and facilities, education, federal funding, employment, housing, credit and the jury system.” On the surface, this sounds unobjectionable — after all, no one deserves to face discrimination. Yet the bill defined “public accommodations” so loosely and called for regulations so sweeping that it would crush religious freedom and radically reshape American society.
The broad, vague definitions in the bill could easily be used to define houses of worship as "public accommodations" which would then become subject to the anti-discrimination law.
The Heritage Foundation identifies 5 groups that could be harmed if the Equality Act becomes law.
https://www.heritage.org/gender/heritage-explains/the-equality-act
On the surface, adding "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" as protected classes is a good idea. But the bill is far to sweeping in its inclusions and ambiguity. And it removes protection of religious rights.
Here's a link the the Church's statement on the Equality Act
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900070426/lds-mormon-church-religious-freedom-full-statement-gay-lgbtq-rights.html
The proposed law, as mentioned by the Church's statement and others, does not advocate for a balanced "fairness for all" approach. It essentially puts LGBTQ+ in an exceptionally protected class that is like a trump card to override any other laws (or even Constitutional rights).
As the Deseret News reported, the Equality Act "limits the application of current federal religious freedom law, weakening religious conservatives’ ability to defend themselves in court"
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900071063/president-donald-trump-2020-election-equality-act-religious-freedom-abortion-rights-roe-v-wade-supreme-court.html
The Deseret News also reported
The act’s supporters have said these steps are necessary to protect the LGBTQ community. They said the law should outlaw anti-LGBTQ bias in all forms, just as it never allows race-based discrimination.If this law, or something similar, were to pass, it would only be a small step for a same-sex couple to sue a church for not performing their same-sex marriage. This law would be a big basis for the lawsuit. The odds are this suit would come in some place like California, where the lower courts would rule in favor of the same-sex couple, and overlook the Constitutional right of freedom of religion. Appeals might even take the case all the way to the Supreme Court.
However, the odds are high that churches who perform any civilly recognized marriage will become required to perform marriages for all couples who request it. Even if same-sex marriage is against the tenets of the religion, because the marriage is a publicly recognized union, and could be argued as a "public accommodation," the church would become subject to the law to not discriminate against LGBTQ couples wanting to get married.
Of course, this would extend to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and temple marriages.
Thankfully the Church has already set a standard.
https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/couples-married-civilly-authorized-for-immediate-temple-marriage
Couple who are married civilly first will not have to wait, but can be sealed in a temple marriage immediately after the civil marriage, or as soon as circumstances permit.
While this policy has been in place in many other countries, where couples are required to be married civilly first, it established a worldwide policy.
It is a new and unfamiliar policy for many members of the Church in the U.S. and most probably see it as a policy that can allow for non-members of the Church to participate with a civil marriage, but still allow the couple to enjoy the blessing of an immediate temple sealing.
However, what this policy does, and nowhere is this mentioned, is prepare the Church for the time (which I believe is coming) when anyone performing a civil marriage will be required to perform marriages for all couples requesting it. When this happens, the Church will be able to decide to stop performing civilly recognized marriages and only perform the temple sealing for couples. And, because of the new policy, couples will be able to get married civilly and immediately go to the temple for their sealing.
Because the temple sealing would be considered a "spiritual" marriage and not civilly-recognized, the law will not have any effect on it. Same-sex couples and their supporters will be frustrated at their inability to force the Church to perform same-sex marriages.
Since this policy was set as a global standard before the Equality Act (or similar law) takes effect, the policy is easily defended as being set without regard to the LGBTQ community.
Had the Church waited to implement this policy until after a law like the Equality Act were put into place, enemies of the Church could easily twist the policy and (the future) decision as being biased towards same-sex people.
Of course, opponents of the Church will still claim bias when the Church no longer performs civil marriages, but at leas there will be a little less fodder for the critics with the policy already in place.
Personally, I think the Equality Act, or similar law, probably won't be passed until the Democrats control both houses of Congress. Even if there's a Republican president, if the Democrats have the majority they will push it through, especially if they have a veto-proof majority. The earliest this might happen is in two years: 2021.
Comments
Post a Comment