How safe is gay marriage? Advot fear creasgly nservative urt

Contents:

• THE ONLY ARGUMENT AGAST GAY MARRIAGE (AND WHY IT NEEDS TO END)
• SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?
• HOW SAFE IS GAY MARRIAGE? ADVOT FEAR CREASGLY NSERVATIVE URT
• GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
• GAY MARRIAGE: THEOLOGIL AND MORAL ARGUMENTS
• ARTICL ON GAY MARRIAGE
• CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS COULD REMOVE IT NEXT YEAR
• GAY MARRIAGE
• THE TOP 10 ARGUMENTS AGAST GAY MARRIAGE: ALL RECEIVE FAILG GRAS!
• GAY MARRIAGE, RELIGN AND THE COURT

THE ONLY ARGUMENT AGAST GAY MARRIAGE (AND WHY IT NEEDS TO END)

’ As a natnal discsn this might be te, but as a policy posn sired by gays, this is eher blatant cricism or a soclogil blunr…or, more srily, a total disnnect om the untry he ris matters about this cisn is not what a dive thory has stated about the fe prt on a marriage certifite, but how we nduct ourselv as a natn.

Scholars and the general public beme creasgly terted the issue durg the late 20th century, a perd when attus toward homosexualy and laws regulatg homosexual behavur were liberalized, particularly wtern Europe and the Uned issue of same-sex marriage equently sparked emotnal and polil clash between supporters and opponents. In other s, the cultural homogeney supported by the domant relign did not rult the applitn of doctre to the civic realm but may nohels have fostered a smoother seri of discsns among the cizenry: Belgium and Spa had legalized same-sex marriage, for stance, spe official opposn om their predomant relig stutn, the Roman Catholic Church.

SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?

Most of the world religns have at some pots their histori opposed same-sex marriage for one or more of the followg stated reasons: homosexual acts vlate natural law or dive tentns and are therefore immoral; passag sacred texts nmn homosexual acts; and relig tradn regniz only the marriage of one man and one woman as valid.

HOW SAFE IS GAY MARRIAGE? ADVOT FEAR CREASGLY NSERVATIVE URT

On July 25, 2014 Miami-Da County Circu Court Judge Sarah Zabel led Florida’s gay marriage ban unnstutnal and stated that the ban “serv only to hurt, to discrimate, to prive same-sex upl and their fai of equal digny, to label and treat them as send-class cizens, and to em them unworthy of participatn one of the fundamental stutns of our society. The Amerin Psychologil Associatn, Amerin Psychiatric Associatn, and others nclud that legal gay marriage giv upl “accs to the social support that already facilat and strengthens heterosexual marriag, wh all of the psychologil and physil health benefs associated wh that support.

2016 printial ndidate and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fra stated that civil unns are aquate as an equivalent to marriage: “Benefs are beg btowed to gay upl [ civil unns]… I believe we need to rpect those who believe that the word marriage has a spirual foundatn… Why n’t we rpect and tolerate that while at the same time sayg ernment nnot btow benefs unequally. Court papers filed July 2014 by attorneys fendg Arizona’s gay marriage ban stated that “the State regulat marriage for the primary purpose of channelg potentially procreative sexual relatnships to endurg unns for the sake of jog children to both their mother and their father… Same-sex upl n never provi a child wh both her blogil mother and her blogil father. Lee Badgett, PhD, Director of the Center for Public Policy and Admistratn at the Universy of Massachetts at Amherst, stated that for many gay activists “marriage means adoptg heterosexual forms of fay and givg up distctively gay fay forms and perhaps even gay and lbian culture.

Pla Ettelbrick, JD, Profsor of Law and Women’s Studi, wrote 1989, “Marriage ns ntrary to two of the primary goals of the lbian and gay movement: the affirmatn of gay inty and culture and the validatn of many forms of relatnships. Queer activist Anrs Zanichkowsky stated June 2013 that the then mpaign for gay marriage “tentnally and malicly eras and exclus so many queer people and cultur, particularly trans and genr non-nformg people, poor queer people, and queer people non-tradnal fai… marriage thks non-married people are viant and not tly servg of civil rights. In Islamic tradn, several hadhs (passag attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) nmn gay and lbian relatnships, cludg the saygs “When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shak, ” and “Sihaq [lbian sex] of women is za [illegimate sexual terurse].

GAY RIGHTS VS. FREE SPEECHSUPREME COURT BACKS WEB DIGNER OPPOSED TO SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

Matt Barber, Associate Dean for Onle Programs at Liberty Universy School of Law, stated, “Every dividual engaged the homosexual liftyle, who has adopted a homosexual inty, they know, tuively, that what they’re dog is immoral, unnatural, and self-stctive, yet they thirst for that affirmatn. A 2003 set of guil signed by Pope John Pl II stated: “There are absolutely no grounds for nsirg homosexual unns to be any way siar or even remotely analogo to God’s plan for marriage and fay… Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go agast the natural moral law.

”John Arthur, an ALS patient, and Jim Obergefell, partners for more than 20 years, are married on a medil plane Maryland Hartong / Ccnati Enquirer via AP fileAdvocy groups were quick to h back at the two nservative jtic, wh the Human Rights Campaign, the untry’s largt gay rights group, sayg a statement that Thomas and Alo had “renewed their war on LGBTQ rights and marriage equaly, as the urt hangs the balance.

GAY MARRIAGE: THEOLOGIL AND MORAL ARGUMENTS

”“She says she will not impose her personal beliefs on the law, and she will le for the law as is wrten, and I believe her bee she has a track rerd of dog that, as do many of the nservative jtic, ” he safe is gay marriage? When Gallup first polled Amerins on the topic of gay marriage, 1996, only 27 percent said they were favor of also noted there was an crease support for workplace protectns for LGBTQ people, which the urt recently led favor of June’s Bostock cisn, termg that Tle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects agast workplace discrimatn based on sexual orientatn and genr were surprised when Gorsuch, a Tmp appotee, voted favor of those protectns, and fact wrote the argued that many “misread Gorsuch, ” whom he lled “not your tradnal social nservative” but rather a “libertarian nservative, ” hence his cisn on that se g through a “pla readg of a statute rather than a large nstutnal exercise.

ARTICL ON GAY MARRIAGE

ImageLorie Smh said her Christian fah requir her to turn away ctomers seekg servic to celebrate same-sex Woolf for The New York TimThe Supreme Court sid on Friday wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to sign weddg webs for same-sex upl spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people. The liberal jtic viewed as somethg else entirely — a dispute that threatened societal protectns for gay rights and rolled back some recent an impassned dissent, Jtice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the oute signaled a return to a time when people of lor and other mory groups faced open discrimatn. Kavangh and Amy Coney Barrett, shifted the urt to the urts have generally sid wh gay and lbian upl who were refed service by bakeri, florists and others, lg that potential ctomers are entled to equal treatment, at least parts of the untry wh laws forbiddg discrimatn based on sexual owners of bs challengg those laws have argued that the ernment should not force them to choose between the requirements of their fahs and their livelihoods.

Addnally, several stat terpret existg laws agast sex discrimatn to apply to bias relatg to sexual orientatn and genr inty, even though they do not have laws explicly forbiddg such stat that do not offer protectns to gay and transgenr people on those grounds, municipal laws ver many Human Rights Campaign, an L. McCoy for The New York TimThe urt’s cisn favor of a Colorado web signer, Lorie Smh, had an unual feature: It was based on njecture and Smh, who objects to providg weddg-related servic for same-sex marriag, never turned down a gay uple.

CALIFORNIA STILL HAS AN ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE LAW ON THE BOOKS. VOTERS COULD REMOVE IT NEXT YEAR

ETFriday’s lg was another reassurg cisn for relig celebratory moment outsi the Supreme Court on Friday, after the urt livered the latt a strg of judgments favor of relig Zuhaib/Associated PrsConservativ who have moral and theologil objectns to gay marriage saw the Supreme Court’s cisn on Friday as reassurance that they would be able to assert their beliefs a public square that they see as creasgly hostile to a 6-to-3 vote, spl along iologil l, the jtic agreed wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to provi servic for same-sex marriag, spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people. Several siar s have centered on nservative Christian small bs owners who object to workg on gay weddgs specifilly, cludg a baker Colorado, two vatn signers Arizona and a Kentucky-based a news nference shortly after the lg was issued, Krist Waggoner, general unsel for Alliance Defendg Freedom, which reprented Ms.

” She said her nsiratn acceptg work as a webse signer was the “msage” of the se, not the inty of the Smh’s portfol clus webs for church, real tate pani and polil many nservative Christians hailed the cisn on Friday, drew cricism om some progrsive Christians and terfah groups, cludg those that serve gay people of fah. ETHere’s how urt battl over servg same-sex upl have played out the Cote for The New York TimIn the latt se volvg same-sex marriage rights, relig eedom and discrimatn, the Supreme Court on Friday led favor of a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right not to provi servic for same-sex marriag spe a state law that bans discrimatn agast gay ’s a brief look at some of the most proment s before Friday’s:A Colorado baker ws urtIn June 2018, the Supreme Court led favor of a Colorado baker who refed to bake a weddg ke for a gay uple. Kennedy wrote that the missn’s members had acted wh “clear and impermissible hostily” to people wh scerely held relig Bra, a kemaker prevailsBra’s Supreme Court led favor of a bakery October 2018 that had refed to make a ke bearg the slogan “Support Gay Marriage, ” sayg the refal was not discrimatory.

The urt’s cisn mak easier for bs Bra to cle ctomer requts that are at odds wh their dispute began 2014, when Gareth Lee, a gay rights activist Northern Ireland, sought to buy a ke for a party om Ashers Bakg Company Belfast that showed two “Same Street” characters, Bert and Ernie; a logo for his group, QueerSpace; and the slogan supportg gay marriage.

GAY MARRIAGE

A florist Washgton State says her rights were vlatedIn 2013, Barronelle Stutzman, the owner of a flower shop the small cy of Richland, southeastern Washgton, refed to create floral arrangements for a gay uple’s two grooms, Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed, had prevly bought flowers at her store, Arlene’s Flowers. ”Invatn signers sue the cy of PhoenixThe Arizona Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments January after two Christian vatn signers said they would refe to create weddg vatns for same-sex upl if Da and Breanna Koski, evangelil Christians and the owners of Bsh & Nib Stud, sued the cy of Phoenix 2016, sayg they feared legal retributn if they did not fulfill requts om gay or lbian upl.

Colorado Civil Rights Cote for The New York TimThe Supreme Court’s cisn on Friday favor of a Colorado web signer has echo of a 2018 se about a baker who had turned away a gay uple seekg a weddg that cisn, Masterpiece Cakhop v.

THE TOP 10 ARGUMENTS AGAST GAY MARRIAGE: ALL RECEIVE FAILG GRAS!

Kennedy, who wrote the majory opn the 7-to-2 cisn 2018, seemed unable to choose between two of his re mments: He was the thor of every major Supreme Court cisn protectg gay rights unr the Constutn and also the urt’s most arnt fenr of ee speech.

“The oute of s like this other circumstanc mt awa further elaboratn the urts, ” he wrote, “all the ntext of regnizg that the disput mt be rolved wh tolerance, whout undue disrpect to scere relig beliefs, and whout subjectg gay persons to digni when they seek goods and servic an open market. After the 2020 electn, Colorado bee a center of electn nspiraci, a e embraced by some of s state is “a nice enpsulatn on what lims have been placed on the Christian right and what power and fluence they n still yield, ” William Schultz, a historian at the Universy of Chigo Divy School who is workg on a book about Christian culture Colorado Sprgs, said last 1992, voters the state passed what was nsired at the time to be an unual ballot iative prohibg Colorado om regnizg gay, lbian and bisexual people as a protected class.

Another poll by Pew found that almost half of whe evangelils born after 1964 favored same-sex marriage 2017, pared to about a quarter of olr whe fah groups that have tradnally opposed gay rights now support some acmodatns for same-sex marriage.

GAY MARRIAGE, RELIGN AND THE COURT

PetersCoverg the media's tersectn wh polics, culture and lawThree years ago, Jtice Neil Gorsuch, who wrote today's opn favor of the webse signer who oppos same-sex marriage, was the thor of a very different opn om the urt, lg that a landmark civil rights law protects gay and transgenr employe om workplace discrimatn. The New Republic published an article reportg that the Colorado webse signer who oppos same-sex marriage, and whose challenge to Colorado’s antidiscrimatn law took this se to the Supreme Court, may not have received an actual requt om a gay uple to create a weddg 30, 2023, 10:17 a. ETHere’s what to know about the ee speech a 6-to-3 vote, spl along iologil l, the Supreme Court sid on Friday wh a web signer Colorado who said she had a First Amendment right to refe to provi servic for same-sex marriag spe a state law that forbids discrimatn agast gay people.

”The se, though amed as a clash between ee speech and gay rights, was the latt a seri of cisns favor of relig people and groups, notably nservative Christians, who celebrated the lg on Friday as a victory for relig dissent, Jtice Sonia Sotomayor lled the lg “profoundly wrong, ” argug that the Colorado anti-discrimatn law “targets nduct, not speech, for regulatn, and the act of discrimatn has never nstuted protected exprsn unr the First Amendment.