The question of legalization of same-sex marriages is generally presented as one of protecting the individual rights of gay citizens. And so long as the issue is merely one of whether the state should interfere with the desire of two persons to live as they like, that’s an argument that strongly appeals to the libertarian instincts of the majority of Americans. However, the problem arises when approval leads to government mandates that affect religious faiths that don’t approve of these relationships. That is why Catholic and Orthodox Jewish agencies have been chased out of the adoption field in certain states. And if President Obama has his way on the issue, the next victims may be military chaplains.
As CNSNews.com reports:
The Obama administration “strongly objects” to provisions in a House defense authorization bill that would prohibit the use of military property for same-sex “marriage or marriage-like” ceremonies, and protect military chaplains from negative repercussions for refusing to act against their consciences, as, for example, in being ordered to perform a same-sex marriage ceremony.
While there are arguments that can be mustered against prohibiting the use of military facilities for same-sex ceremonies, opposition to a measure that would ensure that chaplains couldn’t be ordered to officiate would imply a degree of compulsion that transforms the issue into a religious freedom fight rather than one of gay rights. If President Obama does veto the protections offered to chaplains by the House — as his Office of Management and Budget recommends — then it is possible to envision a future where Catholic, evangelical and Orthodox Jewish clergy will no longer be welcome as military chaplains.
At the American Conservative, Rod Dreher quotes American Jewish Congress chief counsel Marc Stern as saying that, “no one seriously believes that clergy will be forced, or even asked, to perform marriages that are anathema to them.” Yet the “sea change” that same-sex marriage will create in American law will bring with it consequences that advocates for this measure aren’t acknowledging. As Dreher writes:
The strategy of the pro-SSM side seems to be to deny that anything like this could possibly happen, and that people who say it could are being irresponsible scaremongers. Then when it actually happens, they’ll say oh, who cares; those bigots deserve what they get.
Dreher is right. The legal problem here is not so much the direct issue of redefining marriage from the traditional understanding of it being one man and one woman. Rather, it is the implications that stem from government sanction that will redefine some religious believers as being outside of not only mainstream opinion but literally outlaws and vulnerable to prosecution and/or defunding on the grounds of discrimination against gays.
The only way for advocates of same-sex marriage to avoid the stigmatizing of some faiths in this manner is to agree to legal stipulations that remove any possibility that religious institutions could be compelled to sanction behavior their religion regards as immoral. But if they refuse to do so, as the White House is indicating with its opposition to House protections for military chaplains, then gay marriage ceases to be a civil rights issue and becomes the focal point of a kulturkampf in which religious freedom is on the line. If that is the way things are heading, then military chaplains won’t be the last victims in the purge of believers.
Here's a challenging non-military hypothetical. Gay couple wants to have their ceremony (marriage, civil registry, what have you) at a kosher catering hall. The rabbinic organization that certifies the hall says [cont'd]
[cont'd] says "Nothing doing; we are Orthodox. We cannot faciliate something that our religion flatly prohibits. We cannot and will not send a supervisor (usually a rabbi and always an observant Orthodox Jew) to facilitate any such event. n nUnder the laws of Kashrus, and under the certification agreement, the hall cannot hold an event without the necessary supervisors present while the food is prepared and served. And they cannot have food brought in from outside. If they do, the entire facility needs to be re-kashered at considerable expense. (If you do not agree, please check with a reputable Orthodox rabbi and do not simply tell me it cannot be so, or should not be so, or that you read on Wikipedia or your guide to comparative religion that it is not so.) n nCan the hall (which is probably owned by Orthodox Jews) decline to hold the event without being sued for discrimination? Can they charge the customers for the cost of re-kashering the hall? What do they do if the certification organization says "If you hold this event, we are never going to recertify you", and if every reputable kashrus organization says the same?
Interestingly, this question was put to Marc Stern of the AJC in an artlcie about a year ago and he said that there would be issues of discrimination and the possibility of lawsuits, which seems to be to be inconsistent with what he says about Military Chaplains now.
If the kosher catering hall is chartered and functions to serve an exclusively Jewish clientele, then their right to serve Jews only and serve Jews traditionally al pe halacha is probably secure for the forseeable future under the First Amendment–for now at least the government can't force you to take a gay person home for lunch either. Similarly Orthodox congregations can't be compelled to serve pork etc. But unlike Israel, once they step into the commercial marketplace and serve a general non-sectarian public, AFIK things get slippery under the new dispensation. This is not only not a Jewish state but a secular state hostile to religion–Jews might consider concentrating their efforts on securing the freedoms of their parochial institutions and guaranteeing by all means necessary that traditional practices are not torpedoed by the totalitarian pagan Hellenism of the times.
Not without a separate kitchen, and probably a separate hall for the celebrations as well, as the very celebration would be as defiling as the work in the kitchen would be. n nAnd rightfully so. Therefore the force of govt to accept unacceptable unclean clients would be in fact THEFT of the property. Seems to be all the USA govt seems to be good for anyway, these days.
The Obama administration's position on this belies their claim that the President has only recently become in favor of gay marriage. n
Of course, the proposed house bill mixes two unrelated issues: the use of military facilities for gay marriages, and protecting military chaplains whose beliefs prohibit them from sanctifying gay marriages. Maybe the Prez's concern is with the use of facilities.
Sorry, but these complaints are nonsense. n nWe heard IDENTICAL rubbish just 60 years ago when the issue of inter-racial marriage was at the forefront. Back then with such couples, as today with gay couples, silly people refused to allow facilities or protocols to be used by the 'wrong' people. n nIn time, their phobias were erased or discredited. So it will be with opponents of marriage equality today. Their concerns are, at core, irrational and childish. n nWe integrated the military quite well, thank you. And Pres Truman was excoriated at the time. n nWe managed inter-racial marriage quite nicely, though its advocates were smeared disgracefully at the time. n nToday, we are moving toward marriage equality for all of our people, though reactionaries of every religious and political persuasion continue to struggle against fairness and decency. Their efforts are doomed. n nTheir own children don't believe a word they say on this subject. And that's why the tide is turning.
Your absolutely correct. Same sex marriage should be compulsory for all citizens to inculcate the spirit of universal harmony for all peoples. We could count on the sapient vanguards of progressive's children to lead the way. There is the small obstacle of African American church pastors near uniform objection to gay marriage but what do they know about racial and social progress?
That would be "you're absolutely correct." n nThe English word 'your' is the possessive; ie, your prejudices, your phobias, your clumsy syntax. n nOur word "you're" is a contraction, a short-form of "you are"; ie, "you're none too bright", "you're a poor American"; or, "you're not as clever as your mother said you were". n nThat said, the backwardness of certain pastors on this issue is no measure of fairness, decency, or patriotism. This is America: land of the free. You may have heard of this. Perhaps not.
We do know that the homosexual agenda originated from a Stalinist Agenda to destroy America, and nowhere else at all. And too many indicators show proof that it has no other consequence at all BUT great destruction, as Joseph Stalin fully intended. n nJoseph Stalin: America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within. n nGeorge Washington: Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of Liberty abused to licentiousness. n nSamuel Adams: A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security. n nSamuel Adams: He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man…The sum of all is, if we would most truly enjoy this gift of Heaven, let us become a virtuous people. n nPatrick Henry: Bad men cannot make good citizens. It is when a people forget God that tyrants forge their chains. A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, is incompatible with freedom. No free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people but by a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, frugality, and virtue; and by a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles. n nGeorge Washington: Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest prop of the duties of men and citizens. n nThomas Jefferson: God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure if we have removed their only firm basis: a conviction in the minds of men that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever. n nSamuel Adams – “He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard for his country. There is seldom an instance of a man guilty of betraying his country, who had not before lost the feeling of moral obligations in his private connections.” n nSamuel Adams: No people will tamely surrender their Liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and Virtue is preserved. On the Contrary, when People are universally ignorant, and debauched in their Manners, they will sink under their own weight without the Aid of foreign Invaders.
I pray that same sex politics will instead oust the Stalinist Marxism known as Dimocrats and RINOS out of our Govt before it is too late. n nAny Christians here who have NOT yet heard of Rabbi Jonathan Cahn's book and related works on the 9 Harbingers, discussing current American events as compared to Isaiah 8, the passage listing the Harbingers of Israel dismissing God's warning of impending judgement on them for their falling away from Him, which would include and DID, the Great Diaspora of circa 70AD, from which after many previous small diasporas, Israel had been regathered usually in about 70 years, or at worst about 150 yrs. nIn which he describes events in America that I dare say MOST AMERICANS are not even aware, much less have chosen sides with or against – in which American Politicians, related to 9/11, have done things that EXACTLY REFLECT the events of Isaiah 8. n nAnd if America is repeating the pattern of Israel's sins that led to the Great Dispursion, what shall the Living God in Heaven do to America? If you think, "Nothing." – you are already wrong, as a number of Torah and Biblical scholars have investigated and discovered AND REVEALED – but sadly,. few if any are listening. n nVideo is available online.
This is a bunch of B.S. Republican propaganda. No chaplain today is required to officiate at a wedding his/her religion does not permit. r nr nAnd if the author wishes to disagree, he needs to find a single example in the entire history of the military of such. The author is right that there is a kulturkampf, but it is against the liberal religions and he is a part of it. There is absolutely no reason why a minister of a church that approves of same sex marriage should not be permitted to perform one in a military facility if it is in a jurisdiction where such is legal.
As usual, Charlie gets it right. How many orthodox chaplains are forced to officiate at mixed marriages, or a cohen and divorcee? This is just silly stuff.