GUEST COMMENTARY: Don’t Let a Political Wrong Define a Religious Rite: With optional trim to 6

c. 2006 Religion News Service (UNDATED) The future of same-sex marriage and the voice of the conservative right will clash next week (June 6) on the floor of the U.S. Senate in a game of election-year politics. An amendment restricting gay marriage will go to the Senate floor for debate and vote, and in response, […]

c. 2006 Religion News Service

(UNDATED) The future of same-sex marriage and the voice of the conservative right will clash next week (June 6) on the floor of the U.S. Senate in a game of election-year politics.

An amendment restricting gay marriage will go to the Senate floor for debate and vote, and in response, the radical religious right has deemed Sunday (June 4) as Protect Marriage Sunday.


I am a huge advocate for the protection of marriage, but it appears I have a different idea of what that means than the radical religious right and some U.S. senators. I went online to find out what they wanted me to do to help protect marriage, but all I found was information demanding U.S. senators vote for the amendment.

How one feels about the amendment is one thing _ an issue that merits perspectives on civil rights, human dignity, the relationship between houses of worship and the government in formalizing weddings _ but efforts to mobilize a political movement should not be confused with efforts to strengthen marriages, which is a worthy spiritual enterprise.

This constitutional amendment would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Therefore, thousands _ if not millions _ of couples will be discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is covered in hate crimes legislation, and it seems to me this amendment would be a crime of hate. Why else would people want to deny people their rights?

America’s rich religious diversity has resulted in a diverse approach to marriage among our various faith traditions. It is these faith traditions that have the freedom to consecrate marriages on whatever theological grounds they choose.

The marriage amendment discriminates not only against gays and lesbians who want to marry, but also against the faith traditions that deem same-gender marriage to be consistent with their religious creed. If the amendment passes, Congress will be taking away our religious liberty. When one American’s religious liberty is violated, all Americans’ religious liberty is in jeopardy.

We cannot tolerate discrimination being written into the Constitution. So, for those people who want to protect marriage, let me offer a few suggestions:

_ Raise the public’s consciousness of the dignity and importance of women in our still deeply patriarchal society.


_ Increase the minimum wage and offer tax breaks to the working poor so that spouses can see each other for quality lengths of time, rather than briefly passing on their way to two jobs.

_ Encourage family planning.

_ Start a plan to deal with domestic violence.

_ And work to cover mental health care in medical insurance policies so serious emotional difficulties can be prevented from tearing marriages apart.

These are real-world actions to deal with the real-world problem of protecting marriage. All Americans who value the institution of marriage should unite on these goals if we truly want to strengthen our communities and our country.

(OPTIONAL TRIM BEGINS)

People often claim same-sex marriage is a threat to them and their kids. I recently talked about this with the Rev. Bill Sinkford, president of the Unitarian Universalist Association, who has performed many same-sex marriages in his church.

He responded quickly that same-sex marriages pose no threat to other marriages or the institution of marriage. In fact, he cited Massachusetts and pointed out “the Earth did not stop” when the state began allowing same-sex marriages in 2004. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2004 Massachusetts had the lowest divorce rate in the country, at 2.4 divorces per 1,000 residents.

(OPTIONAL TRIM ENDS)

Freedom and equality are prerequisites for religious liberty to flourish in our nation, yet they are cast aside to advance one group’s view of the world. The Constitution is not a party platform, but rather a liberating document that provides all Americans guaranteed rights and freedoms.


Those of us who value religious pluralism must send a unified message that freedom and equality go hand-in-hand with religious liberty.

Congress has no business legislating one religiously based view of marriage. In the interest of religious liberty, faith communities and houses of worship must be allowed to wrestle with the issue of marriage themselves.

(The Rev. C. Welton Gaddy is president of the Washington-based Interfaith Alliance and serves as the pastor for preaching and worship at Northminster (Baptist) Church in Monroe, La.)

KRE/PH END GADDY

Editors: To obtain photos of Gaddy, go to the RNS Web site at https://religionnews.com. On the lower right, click on “photos,” then search by subject or slug.

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!