WITH the Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage, religious conservatives are focusing on preserving their right to object the 5-4 decision made on Friday, June 26.
Their concerns are for the thousands of faith-based charities, colleges, hospitals, and organizations that want to hire, fire, serve and set policy according to their religious beliefs regarding gay marriage.
The Republican Party’s 2016 presidential candidates are already campaigning on the issue. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker urged President Barack Obama and governors nationwide to “join me in reassuring millions of Americans that the government will not force them to participate in activities that violate their deeply held religious beliefs.”
The religious liberty fight is not about the First Amendment, which protects the freedom to worship. Potential conflicts could arise, however, over religious organizations with some business in the public arena—from small religious associations that rent public reception halls, to the massive network of faith-based social service agencies receiving millions of dollars in federal grants.
Some groups, such as the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, want protections for individual business owners who consider it “immoral” to provide benefits for the same-sex spouse of an employee, or other services such as catering to gay weddings.
US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is Catholic, was the swing vote in the controversial case Obergefell v. Hodges. Kennedy raised the issue in the majority opinion granting gay couples the right to marry, saying that First Amendment protections are in place for religious objectors who “may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should be not condoned.”
In his dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts predicted a future clash between religious freedom and same-sex marriage, specifically noting the dilemma for religious colleges that provide married student housing, and adoption agencies that won’t place children with gay couples.
“There is little doubt that these and similar questions will soon be before this court,” Roberts wrote.
Conservative religious groups for years have been on watch for potential battles over religious liberty and LGBT rights, and have been lobbying for religious exemptions in statehouses and Congress. However, anxieties intensified over an exchange during earlier oral arguments in the gay marriage case between conservative Justice Samuel Alito and Solicitor Donald Verrilli.
Alito noted the Supreme Court’s decision in 1983 to revoke the tax-exemption of Bob Jones University in South Carolina because it barred interracial dating. Alito asked if the government would take such action against religiously affiliated schools that oppose same-sex marriage.
“It is certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that,” Verrilli said.
Earlier this month, more than 70 Catholic and evangelical educators sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, urging them to take action to protect conservative religious schools in case of government action to revoke the schools’ nonprofit status.
Last week in Congress, Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah and Rep. Raul Labrador of Idaho introduced the First Amendment Defense Act, which would prohibit the federal government from taking action against an institution that opposes same-sex marriage by revoking a tax-exemption or barring them from receiving grants or contracts.
“In the [three decades] since the Bob Jones decision, the IRS hasn’t sought to revoke the tax exemption of another school over discrimination based on race or gender,” said Marc Stern, a religious liberty expert and general counsel to the American Jewish Committee.
“The Supreme Court decided the Bob Jones case was based on a violation of fundamental public policy, not whether the school’s policy was unconstitutional,” Stern said. “There is no federal law barring discrimination based on sexual orientation.”
Michael Moreland, a vice dean and professor at Villanova University School of Law in Pennsylvania, said the concern over losing tax-exempt status is “a real one.”
“The fact the majority opinion for the court did mention the religious institutions’ right to engage in advocacy with regard to their views about marriage means I don’t think there’s a rush to confront those problems, but they’re there,” Moreland said.
GOP presidential contenders for 2016 are also working to keep religious liberty at the forefront of their campaigns.
At the Faith and Freedom Coalition conference in Washington last week, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said, “The IRS will start going after Christian schools, Christian universities, Christian charities, and any institutions that follow a biblical teaching of marriage.”
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said, “Hillary Clinton and The Left will now mount an all-out assault on religious freedom.”
Last month, Jindal issued an executive order aiming to protect religious objectors after a House bill on the issue failed.
In an earlier Associated Press-GfK poll, more than 8 in 10 Republicans said it was more important “to protect religious liberties than gay rights.”
Many gay marriage advocates argue that the conservative outcry for religious freedom is merely a cover for bias and an attempt to deprive gays of their newly won rights. Elliot Mincberg, a Washington attorney and senior fellow at the progressive organization People for the American Way, said that while some religious exemptions might merit consideration, “the religious right knows a fundraising opportunity when they have one.”
Some LGBT supporters say a balance must be struck between religious liberty and protections against discrimination for gays, as conservatives’ fear grows about whether religious institutions can keep operating under the dramatically new circumstances.
Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said conservatives “have grounds for concern, but not grounds for panic.”
“I don’t think the issues are imaginary, and we know that because the US solicitor general told us so,” he said. (With reports from The Associated Press)
(www.asianjournal.com)
(LA Midweek July 1 – 3, 2015 Sec A pg.1)
