Even if some people are gay, and even if some of the gay people are married, we n still all get along. The amework is already place unr the prcipl of eedom of relign our own Constutn.
Contents:
RELIG FREEDOM VS. GAY RIGHTS: CAN WE ALL GET ALONG?
This volume brgs together some of the world's leadg thkers on relign, moraly, polics, and law to analyze the emergg tensns between relig eedom and gay rights three key geographic regns: the Uned Stat, the Uned Kgdom, and ntental Europe. * freedom of religion vs gay rights *
Relig Freedom and Gay Rights, eded by Timothy Shah, Thomas Farr, and Jack Friedman, brgs together some of the world's leadg thkers on relign, moraly, polics, and law to analyze the emergg tensns between relig eedom and gay rights three key geographic regns: the Uned Stat, the Uned Kgdom, and ntental Europe. Supreme Court Sis Wh Relig Freedom In High Profile LGBTQ Rights Case NPR's Ari Shapiro talks wh Currey Cook of Lambda Legal, the gay rights group that wrote a iend-of-the-urt brief the LGBTQ rights se which the Supreme Court sid wh relig eedom.
This year, the jtic approved taxpayer support for relig tn some circumstanc and let relig employers sistep job discrimatn laws and health surance verage for urt refed to let employers discrimate agast LGBTQ workers a 6-3 lg June, but even then Associate Jtice Neil Gorsuch reerated the jtic' rpect for relig Court grants feral job protectns to gay, lbian, transgenr workers"We are also eply ncerned wh prervg the promise of the ee exercise of relign enshred our Constutn, " he wrote. Democrats claimed her associatn wh groups that fight for relig exemptns om anti-discrimatn laws reprents a risk for gay Coney Barrett was tstee at private school wh anti-gay policiFor her part, Barrett scribed her fah as important, but irrelevant to her jurispnce. A policy agast employg “dividuals who are engaged homosexual behavr or genr-non nformg nduct of any sort”; andA policy agast regnizg “same sex marriage” or extendg “benefs to an employee’s same sex partner.
NPR's Ari Shapiro talks wh Currey Cook of Lambda Legal, the gay rights group that wrote a iend-of-the-urt brief the LGBTQ rights se which the Supreme Court sid wh relig eedom. * freedom of religion vs gay rights *
Forcg a relig employer to hire, reta, and acmodate employe who nduct themselv ntrary to the employer’s views regardg homosexualy and genr inty is not the least rtrictive means of promotg that tert, pecially when Defendants are willg to make exceptns to Tle VII for secular purpos. “The Court do not doubt that Defendants’ terts preventg discrimatn agast homosexual and transgenr dividuals is ‘a weighty one, for our society has e to the regnn that gay persons and gay upl nnot be treated as social outsts or as ferr digny and worth. The Supreme Court th “nclud that the forced cln of a gay-rights as an assistant sut master would impair the exprsive associatn rights of the Boy Suts” the valu of which are nsistent wh homosexual nduct.
Although Jtice Gorsuch’s battle plan did not clu a eedom of associatn challenge, Braidwood neverthels argued that s eedom of associatn would be vlated if forced to hire or reta dividuals who engage homosexual or transgenr nduct. “For the same reasons that Defendants do not have a pellg state tert forcg an anizatn to reta, as a sutmaster, a member who is a gay rights activist, Defendants do not have a pellg tert forcg Relig Bs – Type Employers to hire and reta dividuals that engage nduct that is ntrary to the employers’ exprsive terts. The Government n no more force an associatn that oppos homosexualy or transgenr behavr to hire dividuals engaged that nduct than n force a gay-rights anizatn to hire an avowed opponent of homosexualy.
On the eve of the Internatnal Day Agast Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia (IDAHOBIT), which will be held on 17 May 2021, a group of Uned Natns and ternatnal human rights experts* lls on Stat, fah-based stutns, relig lears and other stakeholrs to nsir the negative impact of exclnary or stigmatizg narrativ on vlence and discrimatn agast lbian, gay, bisexual, transgenr, and genr-diverse (LGBT) persons. Several of them the Middle East and North Ai, South and South-East Asia, and sub-Saharan Ai jtify the matenance of legal prohibns of homosexualy, troduced most s by lonial thori, on the grounds that they uphold the tes of Islam or Christiany, and therefore are necsary to mata public morals. Today, if you ask your average 20-year-old whether is worse for a aterny to exclu women or for a Christian group to ask gay and lbian members to rea om sexual nduct, the rpons would be overwhelmgly one directn.