Civil vs. Religious Liberties

experiment once and you're a poet; twice and you're a libertine.

ahem.

i swear it's coincidental that i'm posting about gay marriage after seeing brokeback mountain for the first time last night -- i'll review that soon.

there is a wonderfully thoughtful essay by peter steinfels in the times today, asking whether gay marriage, which many argue is a civil rights issue, might not infringe on the religious liberty of those whose religions forbid acceptance of gay marriage.

the essay deals thoughtfully with both sides of the issue. in approaching things from a strictly legal standpoint -- i.e., can religious conservatives claim that if gay marriage is made legal in the u.s. it would infringe upon their religious liberty as protected under the first amendment? -- it refrains from name-calling and heated arguments of partisan advocates and instead relies heavily on the well-researched positions of several professors of law around the country.

many of these professors -- even those who consider themselves favorable to gay marriage as a civil liberties issue -- wonder about the implications that legalization would have. and no, they're not talking about the same implications that idiot rick santorum has (namely, that gay marriage will lead to beastiality as a normative sexual practice). they're talking about implications such as religious charitable groups who, in all reality, do great work for the poor, losing their tax exempt status if they cease distributing funds to groups that recognize or promote same sex marriage. many groups might also lose their tax exempt status for discriminating based on sexual orientation.

my two cents, for what it's worth (at least twice that), is this: yes, this is a problem. it would be bad for religious groups to stop some of the good work they do. but in the end, it all comes down to civil liberty. and i think we can avoid the argument that same sex marriage will infringe on people's religious liberties because it's not as if the state will force religious faiths to recognize gay marriage or perform in their ceremonies. it will be optional. that sounds like liberty to me.

also: did it infringe on the religious liberties of the KKK (a religiously affiliated group) to pass civil rights legislation? nupe.

the time has come, i think.

what would jack twist say?