The logical conclusion to this question seems to be “Yes,” based on the response to Indiana’s recent attempt at strengthening the existing Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which strengthens the original federal RFRA to be used between private entities, regardless of whether the government is a party in the action.
I won’t rehash the stories and the arguments, but the question I have for both non-Christian and Christian opponents to INRFRA is this:
Should pastors of any denomination or religious leaders of any sect be legally compelled and coerced to materially support gay marriage by marrying gay people?
This is no slippery-slope question. Given what has transpired the past few months, it is more than appropriate to compare what’s happened to the baker, florist, and candlestick maker—wait, wrong musical!—to what could, and I’d wager probably will happen, to pastors or other religious leaders who have a moral objection to materially supporting an act which violates their deeply held religious views about marriage.
Let’s look at what we’re talking about here: We’re not talking about refusing to serve pastries or arrange bouquets to gay customers. The kind 70-year-old grandmother florist who was sued for not providing material support to a gay wedding said she had a close relationship with the litigant gay man she served flowers to for many years. She just didn’t wish to support an act, gay marriage, which codifies the sin of gay sex.
I liken this protest of the sweet lady who gladly made cakes for her gay customer but refused to service his gay wedding to a pastor who gladly welcomes gay people in his church, but refuses to marry them.
Based on the recent outcry, it seems protestors in Indiana and around the country would have to say the government does indeed have a public interest to both compel and coerce pastors and other religious leaders to perform such acts, even those who have a moral objection to marrying gay people because of their deeply held religious beliefs.
If not, how is this substantially different than the baker, photog, or retaurant owner’s own position?
Why should the deeply held religious beliefs of clergy and non-profit groups—like churches, synagogues, parochial schools who services the general public through acts of charity—find greater protection than the Christian person or business who shares similar values and provides a similar service to the general public?
I say it isn’t substantially different. Which makes me think churches and clergy better hold on for the coming ride…
I don’t want to go all conspiratorial, but how long will it take before a gay couple walks into an evangelical church, approaches an evangelical pastor, and asks them to perform their wedding?
Unfortunately, I’m not so sure this scenario is too far off. Just ask Melissa and Barronelle.
