In this Friday June 26, 2015 file photo, a man holds a U.S. and a 
rainbow flag outside of the Supreme Court in Washington after the court 
legalized gay marriage nationwide. After the decision, religious 
conservatives are focusing on preserving their right to object. Their 
concerns are for the thousands of faith-based charities, colleges and 
hospitals that want to hire, fire, serve and set policy according to 
their religious beliefs, notably that gay relationships are morally 
wrong. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin) 
NEW YORK (AP) — Now that same-sex marriage is legal nationwide, 
religious conservatives are focusing on preserving their right to 
object. Their concerns are for the thousands of faith-based charities, 
colleges and hospitals that want to hire, fire, serve and set policy 
according to their religious beliefs, notably that gay relationships are
 morally wrong.
The Republican Party's 2016 
presidential candidates are already campaigning on the issue. And 
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is urging President Barack Obama and the 
nation's governors "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 isn't about what happens inside the sanctuary. 
First Amendment protections for worship and clergy are clear. Potential 
conflicts could arise, however, over religious organizations with some 
business in the public arena. That category ranges from small religious 
associations that rent reception halls to the public, to the nation's 
massive network of faith-based social service agencies that receive 
millions of dollars in government grants. Some groups, such as the U.S. 
Conference of Catholic Bishops, also want protections for individual 
business owners who consider it immoral to provide benefits for the 
same-sex spouse of an employee or cater gay weddings.
U.S.
 Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy raised the issue in the majority 
opinion Friday granting gays the right to marry. He said 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 not be condoned."
But
 in his dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts predicted a clash ahead 
between religious freedom and same-sex marriage. He specifically noted 
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 have for years been on watch for potential clashes over religious
 liberty and gay rights, and have been lobbying for religious exemptions
 in statehouses and Congress. But conservative anxieties intensified 
over an exchange during April's oral arguments in the gay marriage case 
between Justice Samuel Alito and Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.
Alito
 noted the high court's 1983 decision 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. Verrilli 
said, "It is certainly going to be an issue. I don't deny that."
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.
And last week in Congress, Sen. Mike Lee of Utah and Rep. 
Raul Labrador of Idaho, both Republicans, 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.
Marc
 Stern, a religious liberty expert and general counsel to the American 
Jewish Committee, noted that 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.
The Supreme Court decided the 
Bob Jones case 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.
Still,
 Michael Moreland, a vice dean and professor at Villanova University 
School of Law, 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 hopefuls are working to keep religious liberty in the forefront.
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." Jindal last month issued an executive order aiming 
to protect religious objectors after a House bill on the issue failed.
In
 an Associated Press-GfK poll in April, more than 8 in 10 Republicans 
said it was more important to protect religious liberties than gay 
rights.
Many gay marriage 
advocates say the conservative outcry over 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 
liberal People for the American Way, said while some religious 
exemptions might merit consideration, "the religious right knows a 
fundraising opportunity when they have one."
But
 some gay rights supporters say a balance must be struck between 
religious liberty and protections against discrimination for gays, as 
religious conservatives' fear grows about whether their institutions can
 keep operating under the dramatically new circumstances. Jonathan 
Rauch, 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," said Rauch, "and we know that because the U.S. solicitor general told us so."
____
Zoll
 is the AP national religion writer. Peoples reported in Washington. AP 
news survey specialist Emily Swanson contributed to this report.
Source yahoo news 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment