• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are equal rights for gays incompatible with religious liberty?

Are equal rights for gays incompatible with religious liberty?


  • Total voters
    54

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
With more and more people accepting GBLT people as they there, religious conservatives are starting to lose the argument that GBLT people are fundamentality flawed and should therefore not have equal civil rights to them. In response to that trend, one thing I've noticed is religious conservatives claiming that treating gays like fully equal citizens and human beings is incompatible with the conservatives' religious liberty. Are they right?

This is not a "Is homosexuality wrong?" thread or a debate on same gender marriage. Please stick to the question asked.
 
No, not treating gays like fully equal citizens is an example of Christian conservatives denying the religious liberty of others.

I've encountered some people (mostly Christians) who argue that they are either against gay marriage, or simply won't vote *for* it, because they don't want to promote something that is against their religion. Of course this is ludicrous; these same people would whole-heartedly support the equal treatment under the law of non-Christian religious groups or marriages.
 

MaddLlama

Obstructor of justice
It's not trampling on anyone's religious liberties, because gay marriage is optional, and not forced. Allowing religious groups and ministers etc who would choose to marry gay couples if they could is not restricting the religious liberties of Christians at all, just like being able to buy pork chops, pork loin, and bacon at the grocery store isn't interfering with the religious liberty of Muslims and Jewish people - they just choose to shop at a specialty store, or don't buy pork.
If a religion forbids something, then the people who are part of that religion should just not be involved with it. Trying to force that admonition against something on people who are not part of your religion is in no way protecting religious liberty. Quite the opposite.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
Depends what you mean by "equal rights for gays". If you mean that there be a law that says that anywhere a straight couple can get married a gay one can, then yes, that would be unfair, because it requires religious institutions to marry against their religion. If it's something more broad like if straight people can get married then gays can too then no, I don't think it does.
 

standing_alone

Well-Known Member
Depends what you mean by "equal rights for gays". If you mean that there be a law that says that anywhere a straight couple can get married a gay one can, then yes, that would be unfair, because it requires religious institutions to marry against their religion. If it's something more broad like if straight people can get married then gays can too then no, I don't think it does.

Well, then I guess it's great we never have to worry about such because it's a non-problem. Religious institutions already have the liberty to deny performing marriage to any couple they wish.
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
i voted:

Perhaps occasional compromises are needed, but there is no fundamental incompatibility

only when we start to implement proper equality will we see for definite if there are any problems that need reconciling, and because i can't see the future with 100% probability i'm not willing to rule out the potential need for compromise, from both the LGBT community and the religious communities.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
Depends what you mean by "equal rights for gays". If you mean that there be a law that says that anywhere a straight couple can get married a gay one can, then yes, that would be unfair, because it requires religious institutions to marry against their religion. If it's something more broad like if straight people can get married then gays can too then no, I don't think it does.
Civil is generally accepted as secular. No one is suggesting that religious institutions be made to marry anyone, gay or straight, that they don't want to. (Why anyone thinks a same gender couple would want to be married in a church that despises them is beyond me). The lie that they will be forced to do such is just propaganda from the religious conservatives designed to scare people into opposing equal civil rights for GBLT people.
 

MaddLlama

Obstructor of justice
Depends what you mean by "equal rights for gays". If you mean that there be a law that says that anywhere a straight couple can get married a gay one can, then yes, that would be unfair, because it requires religious institutions to marry against their religion. If it's something more broad like if straight people can get married then gays can too then no, I don't think it does.

Any religious organization can refuse to marry a couple for any reason. There are several churches around where I used to live that wouldn't marry you unless both people had been members of the church for x amount of months. And, certainly if you're not a Christian you're not going to get a Catholic priest to agree to perform your wedding.
Nobody is talking about forcing a religious institution to marry someone they don't want to. I don't know where people get the idea that this is what gay marriage is all about.
Trust me, there are enough liberal churches, UU churches, and non-church-affiliated ministers who are willing to marry gay couples that the ACLU isn't going to come banging on the door of any Protestant or Catholic church demanding that they marry someone.
 

Pah

Uber all member
With more and more people accepting GBLT people as they there, religious conservatives are starting to lose the argument that GBLT people are fundamentality flawed and should therefore not have equal civil rights to them. In response to that trend, one thing I've noticed is religious conservatives claiming that treating gays like fully equal citizens and human beings is incompatible with the conservatives' religious liberty. Are they right?

This is not a "Is homosexuality wrong?" thread or a debate on same gender marriage. Please stick to the question asked.
The "fundamentally flawed" argument was used to support the evil thought that anything but white was inferior.

As religious freedom is applicable to all, the conservatives are wrong to impose thier religious beliefs on those believing the conservatives have "missed the boat".
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
Civil is generally accepted as secular. No one is suggesting that religious institutions be made to marry anyone, gay or straight, that they don't want to. (Why anyone thinks a same gender couple would want to be married in a church that despises them is beyond me). The lie that they will be forced to do such is just propaganda from the religious conservatives designed to scare people into opposing equal civil rights for GBLT people.

i think despise is quite a harsh word to use, and in the majority of cases not accurate either...
 

Pah

Uber all member
i think despise is quite a harsh word to use, and in the majority of cases not accurate either...
Green Ghia is right.

She quantified "despised" by saying "a church that despises". The question is only how many homophobic "churches" fit that category.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
With more and more people accepting GBLT people as they there, religious conservatives are starting to lose the argument that GBLT people are fundamentality flawed and should therefore not have equal civil rights to them. In response to that trend, one thing I've noticed is religious conservatives claiming that treating gays like fully equal citizens and human beings is incompatible with the conservatives' religious liberty. Are they right?

This is not a "Is homosexuality wrong?" thread or a debate on same gender marriage. Please stick to the question asked.

being cynical, I replied "No more so than religious liberty is incompatible with any other form of civil rights."

Because although I see no reason why there should be incompatability with religions, and I don't see many religions "compromising", I think I am in the minority.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
i think despise is quite a harsh word to use, and in the majority of cases not accurate either...
I can see why you would think that, but consider the definition given below and I do think it is an accurate portrayal of how many conservative churches view same gender couples. At the very least it is how many GLBT people feel they are view by such institutions in our country.

Despise:
  1. To regard with contempt or scorn
  2. To dislike intensely; loathe
  3. To regard as unworthy of one's interest or concern
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
I can see why you would think that, but consider the definition given below and I do think it is an accurate portrayal of how many conservative churches view same gender couples. At the very least it is how many GLBT people feel they are view by such institutions in our country.

Despise:
  1. To regard with contempt or scorn
  2. To dislike intensely; loathe
  3. To regard as unworthy of one's interest or concern

i guess this would be for a separate debate thread :p:hug:
 

Reverend Rick

Frubal Whore
Premium Member
i voted:

Perhaps occasional compromises are needed, but there is no fundamental incompatibility

only when we start to implement proper equality will we see for definite if there are any problems that need reconciling, and because i can't see the future with 100% probability i'm not willing to rule out the potential need for compromise, from both the LGBT community and the religious communities.

Exactly right. Tolerance is what is needed. Unless both sides learn to be more tolerant of each other, change will be another generation away.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
Exactly right. Tolerance is what is needed. Unless both sides learn to be more tolerant of each other, change will be another generation away.

Just what do religious conservatives want from GBLT people? We aren't standing in the way of any of their civil rights unlike vice versa. We aren't say they shouldn't practice their religion how they see fit unlike them meddling into our legal affairs. So I don't understand how you can say we should be more tolerant of those who seem to wish to harm us for no other reason than that they want to. We aren't asking anything of you except to get out of our private lives and let us be equal citizens in the eyes of the law.
 
Top