The Nov. 10 Baltimore Sun headline read "Maryland Bishops: Same-sex Marriage Erodes Religious Freedom." There's a theological term for that: it's "bunk."
And there's also a Commandment for that: it's number 9 of 10, which reads, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."
I realize I have the benefit of a seminary education, but even for a first-time reader it should be patently clear that the Ninth Commandment does not read, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor unless thy neighbor is gay or lesbian, in which case all bets are off." The Maryland bishops know that. And if they don't, here's a little remedial reading:
Same-sex marriage will have exactly the same impact on religious freedom that no-fault divorce did. And that would be none. And that would be because the First Amendment to the Constitution makes it ever so clear that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
What that means is exactly what it says. No law in these United States of America can prohibit the free exercise of religion. Period. And that includes Roman Catholic priests choosing not to marry same-sex couples -- just like they already choose not to marry divorced ones. Or Orthodox Rabbis who choose not to marry interfaith ones. Or other clergy who choose not to marry couples who don't go to their church, practice their faith or color inside their theological lines. Bottom line: clergy cannot be compelled by the state to preside at any marriage. Never have been. Never will be. To say otherwise just isn't true.
Which brings me back to the Ninth Commandment. "Bearing false witness" (a.k.a. "lying") is not a traditional Biblical value. I've checked.
And yet over and over again, we hear faith leaders -- like the Maryland bishops -- perpetuating the fiction that extending the equal protection of civil marriage rights to same-sex couples is somehow a threat to religious liberty. Somebody needs to call them on it. And we are who we've been waiting for.
The First Amendment protects the right of the Maryland bishops to believe whatever they want to about the sacrament of marriage. It does not protect their right to write those beliefs into our constitutions and deprive same-sex couples of the same protections civil marriage provides for opposite-sex couples.
The brilliance of the First Amendment is that it guarantees not only freedom of religion but freedom from religion. As a Christian I believe that when Jesus said, "Love your neighbor as yourself," he didn't just forget the caveat that said "unless your neighbor is gay or lesbian." He meant love all your neighbors. And you don't love your neighbor by discriminating against them. And as an American I believe that "liberty and justice for all" really means all -- not just some.
And while I'll defend to my last breath the right of the Maryland bishops to believe whatever they think they know about what God does or doesn't bless, I will also challenge with my last breath, blog, tweet, email, letter-to-the-editor, sermon, speech and soundbite their right to inflict their theology on the rest of us. And I invite you to go and do likewise.
Follow Rev. Susan Russell on Twitter: www.twitter.com/revsusanrussell
Rev. James Martin, S.J.: Between Heaven and Mirth: Faith Leads to Joy
Secondly, the Bishops are not lying. Yes, same sex marriage recognition would be against religious freedom. Since I do not believe in same-sex marriage, if the state would recognize it, then I would have to recognize it in certain cases legally, so my religious freedom not to recognize such unions would be taken away.
You are mistaken, Ms. Russell.
Here is were I differ with you;
Marriage above all else is a legal contract, a legal status as it were, with rights and responsibilities that go along with it. There are many, real, everyday situations that come into play with this status, from buying a house and a pension ( the list is too long to enumerate).
For me it was the end of life issue that changed it for me. If you have ever witnessed someone be denied the comfort of the one they love the most because they were not a "blood relative" or married, I hope you would at least think about the fairness of it all.
If your club, clique or cult doesn't want certain kinds of people in it, so be it, but, don't come asking for money from the government to help you do "Gods Work"
The Catholic church receives millions of dollars every year in the form of grants and other subsidies to do their "good works" As a contractor with the US govt. (grants, ect.) one must abide by certain rules.
That my friend is the crux of the problem..... Money!
Go check it out... A quick look at online sources shows that the 9th Commandment, according to Roman Catholic Tradition, says NOTHING about false witness... And once you figure out why this is so, and understand how it can be so, then you will understand why you can't make those sorts of rational theological arguments with the Roman Catholic Church as an institution.
Furthermore, according to them, you are a Schismatic, a HERETIC...and perhaps are in danger of becoming an Apostate... You know their stance on female clerics! You are fooling yourself if you think that they'll take you seriously. A posture of debate is useless...it gives them too much credit and stature. Only by acting more mature, with greater gravitas than they – and calling for them to mature and "grow up" do you stand a chance of influencing them. It's probably hopeless...but despair is not good.
Same-sex marriage has applied unprecedented strain on the anti-Establishment Clause. Many opponents of marriage equality draw a troubling distinction between a civil society that would impose the religious beliefs of others onto them (which they abhor), and a civil society that would impose their religious beliefs on others (which they demand). They cannot, and should not, have it both ways. And yet, these Bishops not only assert this right,but categorically misrepresent their motives for doing so.
They complain that marriage equality impinges upon the free exercise of their religion. How? A society in which religious freedom is sacrosanct would never compel a Roman Catholic to marry an individual of the same-sex, nor demand that a Catholic priest officiate a wedding between individuals of the same sex. They complain of strictures but provide no evidence whatsoever of how, much less where, such strictures might apply. On the other hand, they would restrict the freedom of others based on their own religious standards--standards that all Americans are ostensibly free to reject.
What the bishops fail to understand is that we live in a pluralistic society, which provides very generous latitude for the practice of religion, including the right to discriminate within their own church. NO one is forcing the bishops to perform a same-gender marriage in their church. NO one has taken away a single practice of their religious beliefs. There is NO threat to 'religious liberty'. If anything, the bishops themselves are intent on forcing others to accept their narrow definitions of marriage, choice, or whatever, thus making it an argument of 'religious liberty for me, but not for thee'.
And they will argue that their so-called 'religious liberty' is being taken away because they won't be able to offer the same level of social services as before. Another spurious argument. So long as the social programs, adoption agencies, etc. accept any public funds they must abide by whatever laws, anti-discrimination statues, that may be in effect. They cry that they'll have to eliminate these programs because of the awful LGBT people who are forcing acceptance on them. No. The Roman Catholic agencies may continue to exist and work and discriminate, just not with any public money.
I'm so tired of the relentless attack of these men [and of course it's ONLY men] attempting to impose a theology on the rest of us. Please, give it up, guys.
It's a threat to marriage, family, children, faith, morality, heterosexuality, and goddam western civilixzation-- such as it is.
I mean the bishops told us so. They're men of god. They wouldn't lie. I mean, when they told us there were witches and that the sun moves around the earth, there was no reason whatsoever to doubt them, was there? Cause if you did, they had a nice warm fire for you to sit in on cold winter nights.
They are god's representatives on earth. They don't have their own suspect motivations. It's not like they have a record of centuries of sexual abuse on innocent children, and centuries of covering the abuse up. You might want to goodgle the phrase "taking comfort with children", read the whole story, and save the surprise of Who Said That? for the end.
And certainly, gay marriage is a bigger threat than poverty, ignorance, starvation, war, bankers' hearts, bankers' ethics, Banco de Espiritu Santo, global warming, over-population, illegitimate births, a priestly sex scandal, and the church's invesitgator into pedophilia turning out to be a child porn collector.