Why do churches want religious exemptions?

It just so happens that on the eve of an historic vote that is expected to “OK” gay marriage in New York, I am in that great state.

I’ve had an opportunity to talk with a couple of people about the impending vote, trying to get a sense of what’s going on, and what is the hesitation in casting that one final vote that would make gay marriage legal.

Churches want to be able to maintain their autonomy and not risk losing their 501c3 standing should they choose not to perform gay marriages, one pastor told me. What churches don’t want is the risk of being sued on the grounds of discrimination if they don’t want to perform a gay marriage.

This pastor paused, then said, “Thing is, nobody tells us who we can and can’t marry now. This is political in the worst sense.”

That is true. If gay marriage is legal in the state, and a particular church does not believe in gay marriage, I am sure that there are ways that any such church can get around doing gay marriages without saying forthright why they refuse to marry any couple. The same is true of adoption agencies, caterers … Businesses have found ways of getting around being overtly discriminatory ever since laws appeared on the books prohibiting the same.

It would be no different now.

It is extremely difficult, the way the laws are written and the ways courts interpret those laws, to “prove” discrimination. A business would have to be crazy these days to say, outright, that it didn’t hire someone because of his or her color, ethnicity, sex or religious orientation.

There will be religious organizations which will be slow to accept a law allowing gay marriage, and there will be religious organizations which will never accept such a law. When laws were passed prohibiting segregation of schools, some white schools closed rather than obey that law.

When people are passionately against laws, they simply bypass them. It has always been and I suspect it will always be.

The politics involved with this gay marriage law are probably something not even remotely related to gay marriage. I have learned that big laws often have so many “wait, let me add this” clauses that I have ceased being surprised. This is a big law. Somebody is going to have to give up something in order for that one last cherished vote to be granted.

But I suspect that at the end of the day, the law will pass, the additional perks will have been gotten, and religious organizations will be free to either follow the law or bypass it, albeit with discretion.

Those religious organizations which support gay marriage will move ahead, and those which don’t will likewise move ahead, each following their own beliefs.

That being the case, the brouhaha seems to be much ado about nothing.

Susan K. Smith  | Jun 23, 2011 1:44 PM