Brent Walker, Executive-Director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, has an excellent column in the latest issue of Report from the Capital which examines President Obama’s track record on church-state issues in his first 100 days.
Walker reflects on Obama’s proposed budget cuts on the deductibility of charitable contributions on those families making more than $250,000 per year. Walker also discusses President Obama’s reconsideration of conscience clause protection for health care providers. Finally, Walker touches on the emerging conflicts between religious liberty and increased gay rights (same-sex marriage). Here’s a snippet from that portion of the column:
Third, a cluster of issues surround the demand for equal treatment based on sexual orientation, mainly in the areas of employment and marriage. These issues feature the difficulty in balancing religious liberty of some with civil rights of others. The administration is committed to equal rights, including domestic partnerships but does not favor same-sex marriage. Arguments continue to rage, along with calls to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and extend rights by various state legislatures and courts.
These issues are fought on the bloodiest battlefields of the culture wars. Yet, there may be some common ground for people of good will on which to stand. Some have suggested a bifurcated system with the state providing rights in a civil partnership, while houses of worship define and decide issues about marriage. (This also could relieve pastors of the oft-complained-of task of solemnizing marriage on behalf of the state.) Another way suggested to arrive at a more peaceful solution would be to link up any extensions of gay rights in the domestic and employment context with broad and vigorous exemptions for religious bodies.
The Obama administration, the Congress and state legislatures would do well to recognize the need to take seriously both sides of the debate and, to the extent possible, help fashion a win-win outcome. Although some will oppose the extension of any civil rights – gay rights or otherwise – I think much of the resistance comes from people who want to ensure the autonomy of their religious organization and protect the integrity of their own beliefs.
In addition to Brent Walker’s column, check out this question-and-answer article entitled A Clash of Rights? Gay Marriage and the Free Exercise of Religion over at the Pew Forum.
The New Hampshire House vote was eye-opening: rejecting protection for religious institutions and associations, and for the individuals working with them, from having to provide same-sex couples the same services, counseling, privileges and accommodations (akin to Buckner retirement center, encampments, retreat centers) designed for traditional marriages.
The NH House wants a narrower protection – for clergy not to be forced to perform same-sex marriages.
The so-called “middle ground” is a figment of the imagination here. The fact is that the LGBT militants will not tolerate perceived discrimination from any quarter – least of all from the religious community, the real target of this legislation.
The free exercise of religious expression in this nation is on life support and about to give up the ghost.